Radiological and Anatomical Features of the Skull Bones of Adult Husky Dogs

Document Type : Research Article


1 Doctor of Veterinary Medicine, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran.

2 Department of Clinical Sciences, Naghadeh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Naghadeh, Iran.

3 Department of Basic Sciences, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran.


Considering the role of skull bones in preserving vital organs, paying close attention to the shape and size of the skull is of great importance when various conditions, such as head trauma, are suspected. However, in order to confirm the suspicion radiologically, examiners need to have detailed information on the normal skull characteristics of each breed. This study aimed to evaluate the radiological and anatomical features of the skull in adult Husky dogs. The current descriptive cross-sectional study examined eight adult Husky dogs (four males and four females) that died due to different conditions, excluding those of the head. After the preparation of the skulls, radiographs were obtained on different views. In addition, the bones were examined in terms of morphological characteristics. Morphometric indices were also measured and the results were recorded. Based on the results of this study, the skull of Husky dogs consists of 11 cranial bones (Ossa cranii), and 21 facial bones (Ossa faciei). Three parameters, including the height and the length of tympanic bullae as well as the orbital index, were greater in females compared to males. However, the differences were not significant. Other parameters were greater in male dogs. The whole skull length and maximum width of the skull showed significant differences between the two genders (p ≤ 0.05). The precise standards obtained in the current study can be used in interpreting the results to determine whether the presenting characteristics are abnormal or breed-dependent.


Main Subjects

1. Dasilveira EE, Dasilvalisboaneto AF, CarlosSabinoPereira H, Ferreira JS, DosSantos AC, Siviero F. Canine skull digitalization and three-dimensional printing as an educational tool for anatomical study. Journal Of Veterinary Medical Education. 2021;48(6):649-55. DOI: 10.3138/jvme-2019-0132
2. Bannasch DL, Baes CF, Leeb T. Genetic variants affecting skeletal morphology in domestic dogs. Trends in genetics. 2020;36(8):598-609. DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2020.05.005
3. Ograk Y, Urosevic M, Drobnjak D. Tarsus Çatalburun Breed of Turkish Hunting Dog (Turkish Pointer). Agriculture, Zemun-Belgrade (Serbia). 2012;6(1):22-24. UDC: 639.1.081.31
4. Geiger M, Evin A, Sánchez-Villagra MR, Gascho D, Mainini C, Zollikofer CP. Neomorphosis and heterochrony of skull shape in dog domestication. Scientific Reports. 2017;7(1):1-9. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-12582-2
5. Krofel M, Hatlauf J, Bogdanowicz W, Campbell L, Godinho R, Jhala Y. Towards resolving taxonomic uncertainties in wolf, dog and jackal lineages of Africa, Eurasia and Australasia. Journal of Zoology. 2022;316(3):155-68. DOI: 10.1111/jzo.12946
6. Gál E, Bartosiewicz L, Kiss V. A fifth–sixth century CE lynx (Lynx lynx L., 1758) skeleton from Hungary: Cranial morphology and zoological interpretations. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. 2022;32(4):41-49. DOI: 10.1002/oa.3101
7.  Hadžiomerović N, Gündemir O, Kovačevi, S. Mandible size and shape of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) and golden jackal (Canis aureus). Adv Anim Vet Sci. 2022;10(2):364-8. DOI: 10.17582/journal.aavs/2022/10.2.364.368
8. Martín-Serra A, Nanova O, Varón-González C, Ortega G, Figueirido B. Phenotypic integration and modularity drives skull shape divergence in the Arctic fox (Vulpes lagopus) from the Commander Islands. Biology letters. 2019;15(9):406-12. DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2019.0406
9. Srinivas Y, Jhala Y. Morphometric variation in wolves and golden jackal in India (Mammalia, Carnivora). Biodiversity Data Journal. 2021;27(9):48-62. DOI: 10.3897/BDJ.9.e67677
10. Wan M, Hejjas K, Ronai Z, Elek Z, Sasvari‐Szekely M, Champagne FA. DRD 4 and TH gene polymorphisms are associated with activity, impulsivity and inattention in Siberian Husky dogs. Animal genetics. 2013;44(6):717-27. DOI: 10.1111/age.12058
11. Rohleder JJ, Jones J, Duncan R, Larson MM, Waldron DL, Tromblee T. Comparative performance of radiography and computed tomography in the diagnosis of middle ear disease in 31 dogs, Vet Radiol Ultrasound. 2016;47(1):45-52. DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2005.00104.x
12. Wisner E, Zwingenberger A. Atlas of small animal CT and MRI. 1st ed. Iowa, USA: Wiley Blackwell; 2015.
13. Widyananta BJ, Saleh CP, Noviana D, Rahmiati DU, Ulum MF, Soehartono RH. Atlas of Normal Radiography in the Dogs and Cats. PT Penerbit: IPB Press; 2017.
14. İlgün R, Özüdoğru Z, Karabulut O, Can M. Macroanatomical and morphometric study on the skull bones of Aksaray Malakli dogs. Folia Morphologica. 2022;81(1):157-63. DOI: 10.5603/FM.a2021.0011
15. Onar V, Pazvant S. Skull typology of adult male Kangal dogs. Anatomia, histologia, embryologia. 2001;30(1):41-8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1439-0264.2001.00292.x
16. Igado OO. Skull typology and morphometrics of the Nigerian local dog (Canis lupus familiaris). Niger J Physiol Sci. 2017;32(2):153-8. PMID: 29485635
17. Onar V, Çakırlar C, Janeczek M, Kızıltan Z. Skull Typology of Byzantine Dogs from the Theodosius Harbour at Yenikapı, Istanbul. Anat. Histol. Embryol. 2012;41(1): 341-52. DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0264.2012.01143.x
18. Evans HE, Christensen C. Miller's Anatomy of the Dog: The skeletal system (skull). 3rd ed. Philadelphia, W.B: Saunders Press; 1993.
19. Couturier L, Degueurce C, Ruel Y, Dennis R, Begon D. Anatomical study of cranial nerve emergence and skull foramina in the dog using magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography. Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound. 2005;46(5):375-83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2005.00068.x
20. Andreis ME, DiGiancamillo M, Faustini M, Veronesi MC, Modina SC. Dog craniometry: a cadaveric study. Università dehli Studi di Milano. 2016;6(1):23-33. DOI: 10.13130/2283-3927/7082
21. Hermanson JW, Evans HE, DeLahunta A. Miller and Evans' anatomy of the dog. Health Sciences: Elsevier; 2018.
22. Watson E. Veterinary forensic radiology and imaging. Forensic Sciences: CRC Press; 2020.
23. DePaolo MH, Arzi B, Pollard RE, Kass PH, Verstraete FJ. Craniomaxillofacial trauma in dogs—Association between fracture location, morphology and etiology. Frontiers Vet. Sci. 2020;242(7):1-15. DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00242
24. Dunand L, Belluzzi E, Bongartz A, Caraty J. Application of a bilateral temporal fascia free graft in a dog with multifragmented frontal sinus and nasal bone fracture. Veterinary Surgery. 2022;32(1):127-44. DOI: 10.1111/vsu.13804
25. Chirchir H. Trabecular bone in domestic dogs and wolves: Implications for understanding human self‐domestication. The Anatomical Record. 2021;304(1):31-41. DOI: 10.1002/ar.24510
26. Urošević MM, Drobnjak D, Stojic P, Urošević MB. Craniological parameters of Yugoslav shepherd dog Sharplanina. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences. 2017;30(3):269-74. DOI: 10.24925/turjaf.v8i7.1571-1576.3452
27. Gracis M. Dental anatomy and physiology.  BSAVA manual of canine and feline dentistry and Oral surgery: BSAVA; 2018.
Volume 16, Issue 1 - Serial Number 34
This issue XML files are being prepared.
February 2024
Pages 33-44
  • Receive Date: 29 May 2023
  • Revise Date: 15 January 2024
  • Accept Date: 04 February 2024