Inter- and intra-sexual behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris)

Pal, Sunil; Ghosh, B; Roy, Surajit

doi:10.1016/s0168-1591(98)00220-2

Cited by 43 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in Indian free-ranging dogs, males forced copulations on unwilling, often sexually inexperienced, oestrous females who responded with a combination of aggressive, submissive, and escape postures. However, attempts to force mating were less successful than mating attempts that elicited female cooperation (Ghosh et al 1984;Pal et al 1999). In summary, play with females may allow males to practice both cooperative and competitive mating strategies in a less serious context.…”

Section: Muzzle Lick <1%mentioning

confidence: 94%

“…If so, it could translate into greater male reproductive success later in life via female mate preferences. Pal et al (1999) found that in a population of freeranging dogs in India, oestrous females selectively allowed some males to mate and even solicited them but avoided other males or even attacked them if they tried to mount. Beach & LeBoeuf (1967) also reported female mating preferences in captive dogs.…”

Section: Muzzle Lick <1%mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Partner preferences and asymmetries in social play among domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, littermates

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Muzzle Lick <1%mentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Muzzle Lick <1%mentioning

confidence: 99%

Partner preferences and asymmetries in social play among domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, littermates

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Groups typically contain a dominant or primary breeding male and female pair (the parents) and their offspring of various ages, with pack sizes ranging between three and 12 individuals; unrelated animals are rarely allowed to join a pack (Thomson 1992a;Corbett 2001a). In comparison, feral/village dogs tend to live in large groups, but in most situations do not form distinct social groups or pair bonds, or defined territories, and they depend on anthropogenic food (subsidies) rather than wild prey (Berman & Dunbar 1983;Pal et al 1999;Boitani et al 2006). Village and pariah dog communities are, however, highly variable, with disparity in the degree of social behaviour observed across various study sites (Cafazzo et al 2010).…”

Section: Behavioural Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taxonomic status of the Australian dingo: the case for Canis dingo Meyer, 1793

Smith

Cairns

Adams

et al. 2019

Zootaxa

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The taxonomic status and systematic nomenclature of the Australian dingo remain contentious, resulting in decades of inconsistent applications in the scientific literature and in policy. Prompted by a recent publication calling for dingoes to be considered taxonomically as domestic dogs (Jackson et al. 2017, Zootaxa 4317, 201-224), we review the issues of the taxonomy applied to canids, and summarise the main differences between dingoes and other canids. We conclude that (1) the Australian dingo is a geographically isolated (allopatric) species from all other Canis, and is genetically, phenotypically, ecologically, and behaviourally distinct; and (2) the dingo appears largely devoid of many of the signs of domestication, including surviving largely as a wild animal in Australia for millennia. The case of defining dingo taxonomy provides a quintessential example of the disagreements between species concepts (e.g., biological, phylogenetic, ecological, morphological). Applying the biological species concept sensu stricto to the dingo as suggested by Jackson et al. (2017) and consistently across the Canidae would lead to an aggregation of all Canis populations, implying for example that dogs and wolves are the same species. Such an aggregation would have substantial implications for taxonomic clarity, biological research, and wildlife conservation. Any changes to the current nomen of the dingo (currently Canis dingo Meyer, 1793), must therefore offer a strong, evidence-based argument in favour of it being recognised as a subspecies of Canis lupus Linnaeus, 1758, or as Canis familiaris Linnaeus, 1758, and a successful application to the International Commission for Zoological Nomenclature - neither of which can be adequately supported. Although there are many species concepts, the sum of the evidence presented in this paper affirms the classification of the dingo as a distinct taxon, namely Canis dingo.

show abstract

“…Unlike wolves, most free-ranging dogs exhibit a promiscuous mating system in which both males and females mate with multiple partners (e.g [79], [80], [81]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Variables Affecting Mate Preferences, Copulation and Reproductive Outcome in a Pack of Free-Ranging Dogs

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mating and reproductive outcome is often determined by the simultaneous operation of different mechanisms like intra-sexual competition, mating preferences and sexual coercion. The present study investigated how social variables affected mating outcome in a pack of free-ranging dogs, a species supposed to have lost most features of the social system of wolves during domestication. We found that, although the pack comprised multiple breeding individuals, both male copulation success and female reproductive success were positively influenced by a linear combination of dominance rank, age and leadership. Our results also suggest that mate preferences affect mating outcome by reinforcing the success of most dominant individuals. In particular, during their oestrous period bitches clearly searched for the proximity of high-ranking males who displayed affiliative behaviour towards them, while they were more likely to reject the males who intimidated them. At the same time, male courting effort and male-male competition for receptive females appeared to be stronger in the presence of higher-ranking females, suggesting a male preference for dominant females. To our knowledge, these results provide the first clear evidence of social regulation of reproductive activities in domestic dogs, and suggest that some common organizing mechanisms may contribute to shape the social organization of both dogs and wolves.

show abstract

Inter- and intra-sexual behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris)

Cited by 43 publications

References 18 publications

Partner preferences and asymmetries in social play among domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, littermates

Partner preferences and asymmetries in social play among domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, littermates

Taxonomic status of the Australian dingo: the case for Canis dingo Meyer, 1793

Social Variables Affecting Mate Preferences, Copulation and Reproductive Outcome in a Pack of Free-Ranging Dogs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About