The important role of private wildlife organisations in facilitating scientific research: A case study of the Australian Dingo Foundation - Allen ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Theme edition. The dingo dilemma: cull, contain or conserve, edited by Thomas Newsome, Chris Dickman and Daniel
Lunney.
The important role of private wildlife
organisations in facilitating scientific research:
A case study of the Australian Dingo
Foundation
Bradley P. Smith1,2, Shennai G. Palermo2, and Lyn Watson2*
1
Smith Human-Wildlife Coexistence Lab, School of Human Health and Social Sciences, Central
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
Queensland University Australia, Adelaide Campus, 44 Greenhill Road, Wayville, South
Australia, Australia.
2
Australian Dingo Foundation, Toolern Vale, Victoria, Australia.
*
To whom correspondence should be addressed:
Mrs Lyn Watson. Australian Dingo Foundation. P.O. Box 502, Gisborne, Victoria 3437, Australia.
Tel: +61 03 5428 1245. E-mail: dingodiscovery@yahoo.com.au
As we enter an era of global mass extinctions, it is important to tackle wildlife research and
conservation from multiple fronts, including those made available by wildlife organisations, zoos
and sanctuaries. Captive studies are particularly useful when studying free-ranging populations is
difficult, and/or when controlled conditions are required. Yet, despite the significant role that they
play in supporting research and conservation of species and ecosystems, they are rarely recognised
ABSTRACT
in the scientific literature. Here we present a case study of the Australian Dingo Foundation (ADF),
a private organisation and captive breeding facility that actively supports research and conservation
efforts relating to the dingo (Canis dingo). Over the past decade (2010 to 2020), the ADF has
facilitated research across eight research disciplines that include archaeology, behaviour, biology,
cognition, evolutionary psychology, non-lethal management, reproduction and parental behaviour, and
vocalisations. This has resulted in at least 21 published scientific studies which are summarised in
this paper. As this case study demonstrates, captive facilities have the potential to contribute to the
understanding and conservation of dingoes by providing practical alternatives to, and/or supplement
studies of free-ranging populations. We conclude by outlining some of the implications and limitations
of conducting research using captive dingo populations.
Key words: Science; research; conservation; captivity; zoos; sanctuaries; organisations; not-for-profit.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7882/AZ.2020.023
Introduction
Not-for-profit wildlife organisations, zoos and sanctuaries behaviour. Work was directly carried out at their custom
provide a fundamental role in the conservation of research facilities in Alice Springs, NT (Division of Wildlife
many of Australia’s native species such as the dingo Research; Figure 1) and Canberra, ACT (Arid Zone
(Canis dingo). Not only do captive populations provide Research Institute). Funding for much of the early research
opportunities to observe and engage with wildlife, with dingoes, including those carried out by the CSIRO,
they are actively involved in conservation education, was provided by the Australian Meat Research Committee
wildlife tourism, breeding programs, and the facilitation and the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation, in an
and financial support of research (Tribe 2001; Tribe effort to “know thine enemy” (Newsome et al. 1972, p.1),
and Booth 2003). The contribution to the latter is and thus assist with eradication attempts. Contemporary
particularly important, because research investigating funding for dingo research comes from a range of sources,
the biology and behaviour of many free-ranging species and is conducted by scientists from around the world. These
is rarely possible, or at least very difficult. researchers represent a number of scientific disciplines,
and assert that the dingo is a scientifically and culturally
There is a long history of utilising captive dingoes for valuable species (Smith 2015). Research and the number
research, the first of which were carried out by CSIRO of scientific publications focusing on the dingo has also
in the 1970s, 80s and early 90’s (Corbett 2001). These increased dramatically over the past few decades (see Smith
captive studies, led by ecologists Alan Newsome, Laurie and Appleby 2015), including research involving captive
Corbett, and Peter Catling, were used to complement dingo populations.
their field studies on several aspects of dingo biology and
2020
Australian
Zoologist A
Smith et al.
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
Figure 1. CSIRO experimental officer with captive dingoes held at their research center in the Northern Territory.
Photo taken in 1967. Source: National Archives of Australia, A1200, L64195.
The benefits of captive research In captivity, not only can housing conditions be
manipulated and replicated, but the identification and
Like most wild canids, dingoes are notoriously difficult to selection of individuals is easier (including sex, age, body
study in the wild because they are highly mobile, occupy mass, ancestry, genetics). Scientists have greater power
large territories, are difficult to see in many environments, to take medical, physiological or observational samples
and are generally reclusive (Klinghammer and Goodman from individuals with known life histories. To give an
1987; Morrant 2015). As such, the study of many aspects example, to estimate the food consumption of dingoes,
of biology and behaviour in the field become impractical Green (1978) required carefully controlled experiments
and are better suited to captive situations where with tame dingoes in laboratory settings. In the CSIRO
conditions can be controlled. In fact, a more complete facilities, researchers were able to extensively study dingo
understanding of behaviour can often be achieved when reproductive biology, behaviour and seasonality (Newsome
field observations are supplemented by, or aided by, et al. 1973; Catling 1979; Catling, Corbett, and Newsome
observations conducted in captivity. To give an example, 1992); to look at the impact and identification of dingo-
Allen (2015) used dingo paw prints left in sand plots to dog hybrids, including genetics and coat colour (Newsome
determine the impact of poison baiting programs on the and Corbett 1982); and to develop age determination
abundance and age distribution of the resident dingoes. techniques and measure growth rates (Catling, Corbett,
To facilitate this research, measurements of dingo paws and Westcott 1991).
from captive dingoes of known ages were collected and
used as a reference sample. Much of our understanding Captive environments also offer a valuable and cost-
of the social behaviour of wild canids was gained through effective opportunity to test the behavioural responses
captive wolves (Schenkel 1947) and later supported by of dingoes to non-lethal tools or strategies before large
field studies by Mech (1970). Similarly, a lot of early scale field testing. For instance, the effectiveness of an
knowledge of dingo social behaviour was based on studies ultrasonic device as a deterrent (Edgar et al. 2007).
of captive populations and substituted with observations Captive dingo populations have been used to test the
of free-ranging dingoes (Corbett and Newsome 1975; behavioural responses of dingoes to dingo urine (Robley
Corbett 1988). Captive research continues to add value et al. 2015), and the anti-predator reactions of kangaroos
to our understanding of wild canids (e.g. Kershenbaum et to dingo urine (Parsons and Blumstein 2010). The
al. 2016; Gese et al. 2018). collection of urine (including from known individuals)
for such purposes would be virtually impossible in the
B
Australian
Zoologist 2020The contribution of captive dingo populations to scientific research
wild from living animals, as would a controlled setting for as government watchdogs and lobbyists. 5) Facilitate
determining its effect on behaviour. scientific research. The significance of these roles is
largely under-acknowledged, particularly by the scientific
There are many questions regarding ethology and community. With this in mind, we wish to draw attention
psychology that require well-socialised animals that can to some of the positive and valuable roles that sanctuaries
only be found in captive situations. Some argue that can play in aiding scientific studies and conservation efforts.
for certain behaviours (such as following social cues), One organisation, the Australian Dingo Foundation (and
wolves must be intensely socialised and kept separate its affiliated Dingo Discovery Sanctuary and Research
from conspecifics for most of their first 4-6 months in Centre), has provided an invaluable contribution to the
order to get accurate results (suggested by Klinghammer scientific understanding of the dingo across multiple fields
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
and Goodman 1987, and adopted in the study by Miklósi of research.
et al. 2003). Research investigating dingo cognition and
behaviour conducted by Smith and Litchfield (2010a; The Australian Dingo Foundation (ADF), established
2010b; 2013) and parental behaviour (Hudson et al. in 2006, is a not-for-profit organisation and Federally
2016; Hudson et al. 2019) were possible because captive registered conservation charity. The ADF supports a
populations provided a sample of individuals who were captive population of dingoes at the Dingo Discovery
known, who were comfortable being in test situations Sanctuary and Research Centre (hereafter Dingo
and handled by staff, and a controlled environment for Discovery Centre). The Dingo Discovery Centre,
the experimental setup. In addition, captivity presents established in 1990, is located on 40 acres in the foothills
opportunities for ad hoc observations to occur, such as the of the Macedon Ranges, Victoria (Figure 2). At any one
use of tools (Smith et al. 2012). time, the sanctuary houses around 40 genetically ‘pure’
and entire adult dingoes in custom-built enclosures. This
Socialised dingoes also aid the process of taking biological includes a population of captive and wild born individuals
samples in a stress-free manner, often avoiding the need for from all regions of Australia. For a comprehensive summary
sedation. An example of this was the longitudinal study by of the housing and management of this population see
Smith, Flavel, and Simpson (2016) who measured seasonal Smith and Watson (2015).
variation in cortisol. Not only does interacting with
captive animals provide insights not otherwise practical The ADF and its volunteers play a significant role in
in the wild (e.g., comparative studies of problem solving dingo conservation through advocacy (e.g., organising
behaviour - Smith and Litchfield 2010a, 2010b, 2013), petitions, lobbying government, social media presence),
but failure to socialise captive wolves and dingoes for education (e.g., running sanctuary tours, puppy open days,
certain experiments may lead to erroneous results because fundraising events, community and school education
the presence of humans, particularly in close proximity, sessions), and an active breeding program (e.g., maintaining
might disrupt the animal’s behaviour (Klinghammer and several breeding lines, supplying zoos and wildlife parks
Goodman 1987). with dingoes for exhibition). Through these activities
they also facilitate and support non-invasive scientific
Through wild rescue and captive breeding programs, research by making their captive dingo population
populations held in private sanctuaries may provide a available to national and international scientists. The
reservation of genetically ‘pure’ dingoes from regions Dingo Discovery Centre has been directly supporting
around the country, should dingoes become endangered genetic studies since its inception, and behavioural studies
or absent. They may also be useful for reintroduction since the late 1990’s (Wilton et al. 1999; Wilton 2001),
programs involving the release of dingoes into national and the ADF has supported dingo research by providing
parks (Ritchie et al. 2012; Newsome et al. 2015). Private financial support through scholarships such as the ‘NWG
sanctuaries with active breeding colonies, typically have and Anne Macintosh Student Scholarship’.
skilled dingo handlers, who can likely offer valuable services
and consultation for reintroduction and rewilding programs. The sanctuary maintains a healthy, entire, and diverse
population of dingoes which enables them to suit the
requirements of researchers from a plethora of research
The Australian Dingo Foundation
disciplines (for examples, see Figure 3). These include (but
There are a handful of private not-for-profit organisations not limited to): animal behaviour (e.g., social behaviour
scattered across the country that maintain captive dingoes and parental care), cognition (e.g., problem solving,
and are dedicated to dingo conservation. As outlined higher order behaviour), evolutionary and comparative
by Smith and Watson (2015) these organisations make psychology, biology (e.g., microbiome, stress responses,
at least five key contributions. 1) The preservation of urine chemistry), non-lethal management (e.g., testing
genetically ‘pure’ dingoes from regions across Australia efficacy of non-lethal biological deterrents), and genetic
(i.e., dingoes with no modern dog ancestry). 2) Provide testing. To demonstrate this, in Table 1 we present
a source of animals for displays at wildlife parks, and for a number of published scientific studies that resulted
future rewilding programs. 3) Raise community knowledge from research that took place or based on dingoes held
and awareness of dingoes and their conservation. 4) Act at the sanctuary between 2010 and 2020. The list of
2020
Australian
Zoologist CSmith et al.
A) B)
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
C)
Figure 2. The Dingo Discovery Centre. (a) A section of the custom dingo housing (Photo: Bradley Smith). (b) Closeup
of the enclosures (Photo: Bradley Smith). (c) A dingo in one of the exercise yards (Photo: Shari Trimble).
publications was sourced from the records maintained by physiological studies of dingoes that are born and raised
the ADF, and the methodology and acknowledgements of in captivity (O’Regan and Kitchener 2005; Hartstone-
each publication cross-checked to ensure the sanctuary Rose et al. 2014), particularly where selective breeding
or foundation was acknowledged as a contributor. It is and multiple generations of captive-bred animals are used.
likely that additional studies have been conducted at Although in saying this, the appropriateness is entirely
the sanctuary, but the results not published, and it is also dependent on the purpose of the study. For example,
possible that not all published outcomes are presented in captive-bred animals can provide a unique opportunity
the table (although none were deliberately omitted). to assess the relative importance of environmental and
genetic influences on morphology (O’Regan and Kitchener
2005); for examining human-animal relationships and
Cautions when using captive dingo
interactions (e.g. Ward and Melfi 2015); and of course
populations for scientific studies for studying captive welfare, behaviour and management
It is important when studying the behaviour of wild (Hill and Broom 2009).
animals in captivity that they be kept in a way that
maximises their opportunities for the expression of normal There are also some behaviours observable in captivity
behaviour. One concern that has been raised about using that may not translate to wild populations. For example, in
captive populations for research, and their value to dingo wild canids, tool use has been observed in captivity (Smith
conservation more broadly, is that captivity somehow and Litchfield 2012) but not in free-ranging populations.
changes the individual so it no longer truly represents Although this provides insight into the cognitive potential
the species. Corbett (2001) for instance, argued that a of the species, the behaviour observed in captivity is likely
captive dingo ceases to be a dingo and is “just another to be a reflection of increased opportunity and energy to
dog” because selection pressure for certain traits can explore and manipulate objects within the environment.
easily take place, both deliberately and inadvertently, More realistic and ecologically valid examples of tool-use
and therefore could override the natural selection of wild and higher order behaviours have been observed in the
characteristics. The impact of captivity, which include field in other canids (see Smith, Appleby, and Litchfield
unnatural diets (even when foods are mimicked to provide 2012 and references within), but such observations remain
adequate nutrition) and restriction of movement, is likely rare and difficult to capture.
to be most significant in relation to morphological and
D
Australian
Zoologist 2020The contribution of captive dingo populations to scientific research
Table 1. A list of publications grouped across eight discipline areas, that has resulted from research carried out at
the Dingo Discovery Sanctuary and Research Centre (DDC) between 2010 and 2020. A brief summary of the
background and/or aims, methodology, and main findings from each publication are provided.
Discipline Title Background/Aims Methods Findings Reference
Archaeology Dingo scat-bone To address the lack Scats from 25 captive Wild and captive dingo skeletal Reynolds,
‘signature patterns’: of data on carnivore dingoes from the DDC modifications were similar but Dortch,
An actualistic study modifications to skeletal and 31 wild dingo dependent on prey consumed. and Balme
and comparison of fragments with focus on scats were analysed Captive dingo scat contained (2016)
wild and captive scat- the dingo. for skeletal fragments. fewer and smaller skeletal
bone assemblages Useful as a potential Tooth ‘pits’ and ‘scores’ fragments than wild dingo
and interpretation of were also measured on scats. Both tooth-mark and
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
investigative tool
bone fragments from at Holocene skeletal fragments. scat techniques are best used
Witchcliffe Rock Shelter, archaeological sites. in combination. Dingoes have
south Western Australia. characteristic tooth-marks,
of which were identified on
some skeletal fragments found
in Witchcliffe rock shelter.
Analysis of pit and Comparative approach DDC was used to Devils and tiger quolls Koungoulos,
score tooth-mark sizes for archaeological pilot the methodology produced very large tooth Faulkner,
from bones modified material, using dingoes, used in the larger study. marks in relation to their and
by Holocene Australian devils, quolls, monitor Experimental feeding body size. Aussie fauna does Asmussen
terrestrial fauna in lizards, dogs and human trials of captive animals, not conform to international (2018)
relation to body size. pit marks and scores including analysis of trends, that is, body weight
left on bone. 2895 tooth marks. does not correlate with tooth
mark size. Carnivores that
consume bone in their diet
will have specific adaptations
that will determine pit mark
and score sizes left on bone
fragments.
Behaviour The function of play To investigate the role Camera footage was The behavioural function Byosiere et
bows in Canis lupus of domestication on the taken of 5 litters of play bows (i.e. as a al. (2018)
and its variants: A function of behavioural (10 puppies total) visual signal) is similar for
comparison of dingo play bows in canids. interacting at the DDC. dingoes, domestic dogs
(Canis lupus dingo), dog Play behaviour was and wolves. Plays bows are
(Canis lupus familiaris) observed and coded more exaggerated, longer,
and wolf puppies (Canis according to five criteria and involve vocalisations in
lupus). and compared with domestic dogs compared with
those of dogs and dingoes and wolves.
wolves.
Biology The effect of age, To analyse the canid Scat samples from 101 Canid microbiome differences Flavel
gender, and antibiotics microbiome at different domestic dogs and can be attributed to (2012)
on the canine gut life stages, and how it from 28 dingoes at the various factors, such as age.
microbiome. is affected by factors DDC were analysed Bacteroidetes/ prevotella group
like age and gender. To for two main bacterial and clostridia coccoides were
compare the microbe classes, bacteroidetes found in Labradors and
of domestic dogs and and clostridia. dingoes at different life stages.
dingoes.
Quantification of To better understand Saliva samples were Cubs had higher cortisol Smith,
salivary cortisol from ‘stress’ and its collected from 13 levels than adults. Adults did Flavel, and
captive dingoes (Canis implications on captive adult dingoes, and 8 not differ, but males during Simpson
dingo) in relation to age, and wild dingoes. To dingo cubs from the breeding season had higher (2016)
gender, and breeding obtain a reference DDC across several cortisol levels than females.
season. range of dingo salivary time points (across a
cortisol levels. day, development and
seasonality).
Cognition How well do dingoes To test dingoes on a A v-shaped version of Dingoes were proficient at Smith and
(Canis dingo) perform spatial problem-solving the ‘detour task’ using completing the task with fewer Litchfield
on the detour task. task. Previously tested four experimental errors and shorter delays than (2010a)
wolves performed conditions was tested dogs. Wolves and dingoes are
better than domestic on 20 dingoes at the more capable at non-social
dogs - a potential result DDC. Success, latency spatial problem solving than
of domestication. and errors detouring domestic dogs.
fence were measured.
2020
Australian
Zoologist ESmith et al.
Discipline Title Background/Aims Methods Findings Reference
Dingoes (Canis dingo) To test the The ‘object-choice Dingoes passed 6/9 Smith and
can use human social responsiveness of task’ was tested on 7 human social cues. Dingo Litchfield
cues to locate hidden dingoes to human social dingoes at the DDC to performance was more (2010b)
food. cues, as they have a see how they respond akin to wolves than dogs,
unique evolutionary to 9 different human suggesting domestication may
history that may shed social cues. Success influence the comprehension
light on canid evolution. resulted in approaching of human gestures.
container being referred
to by human.
Spontaneous tool-use: To document the Two male dingoes Observations of tool-use Smith,
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
An observation of a cognitive abilities of two at the DDC were extend to canids. Highlights Appleby,
dingo (Canis dingo) captive dingoes, and the observed and recorded the dingoes potential for and
using a table to access first case of tool-use in exhibiting higher order ‘intelligent’ behaviour adds Litchfield
an out-of-reach food the Canidae family. behaviours. 1) Sterling insight into their cognitive (2012)
reward. moved a table in the abilities and potential.
enclosure to reach an
otherwise unobtainable
treat.
2) Teddy opened a gate
latch to get to his mate
when he was separated
from her.
Looking back at ‘looking To find out whether A ‘rope-pulling task’ was Dingoes do not rely on Smith and
back’: Operationalizing dingoes look-back tested on 12 dingoes humans for assistance during Litchfield
referential gaze for for human assistance at the DDC, with a tasks in the same way as dogs. (2013)
dingoes in an unsolvable when faced with solvable trial, followed A variety of ‘look-backs’ was
task. an unsolvable task. by an unsolvable one. observed in dingoes but was
Previously tested canids Behaviour in response not likely associated with
included domestic dogs to unsolvable condition seeking human assistance. This
and wolves. Domestic coded. resulted in the refinement of
dogs looked back to the definition of a ‘look-back’.
humans for assistance,
wolves did not.
Evolutionary The evolution and To investigate the An ‘inequity aversion Both canid species did not McAuliffe
psychology development of expression of ‘judging task’ was tested on 72 express ‘inequity aversion’; (2013)
inequity aversion. fairness’ or ‘inequity dogs and 11 dingoes not sensitive when only
aversion’ in dogs and at the DDC. Unfamiliar ‘confederate partner’
dingoes. To determine human handlers and received food. May not be
whether this is a unfamiliar dog or a cooperative mechanism
result of a cooperative dingo ‘confederate in social canids. Looking at
mechanism found in partners’ were used. human handlers was more
social canids, or a result Trials involved absence/ prevalent in dogs than in
of domestication. presence of food. Video dingoes.
recordings were coded
and analysed; sensitivity
to presence/absence
of food, response time
and looking at human
handlers.
Exploring the To investigate the Three experimental No evidence for overimitation Johnston,
evolutionary origins origins of learning trials used on 40 dogs in dogs or dingoes. Dingoes Holden,
of overimitation: A via ‘copying’ or and 13 dingoes at the may be better at finding and Santos
comparison across ‘overimitating’ in DDC. 1) Transparent aspects of the puzzle that are (2016)
domesticated and non- humans. To establish puzzle box, lever not irrelevant, compared to dogs.
domesticated canids. whether or not needed to obtain treat. Overimitation appears to be
overimitation is a 2) Non-transparent a unique form of learning in
shared learning skill with puzzle box, lever not humans.
dogs, which have close needed to obtain treat.
social bonding with
humans. 3) Transparent puzzle
box, lever needed to
Dingoes used as a obtain treat.
comparison to dogs.
F
Australian
Zoologist 2020The contribution of captive dingo populations to scientific research
Discipline Title Background/Aims Methods Findings Reference
Uncovering the origins To explore interspecific Duration of eye contact Dingoes established eye Johnston et
of dog–human eye communication using made by dingoes contact more than wolves, al. (2017)
contact: Dingoes human-dingo eye was recorded over a but less than dogs. Human-
establish eye contact contact. Dingoes 5-minute period with canid eye contact may have
more than wolves, but were tested to gain 23 dingoes at the developed at the onset of
less than dogs. further insight into DDC. Familiarity was domestication. Prolonged eye
canid domestication, also tested to see if contact may have evolved
given their unique eye contact changed later, especially toward familiar
evolutionary history. according to whether humans, as observed in
or not the dingo knew domestic dogs.
the handler.
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
Non-lethal How guardian dogs To determine how Dingo vocalisation Dingo vocalisation playbacks van Bommel
management protect livestock from maremma dogs recordings (howling) and scent elicited behavioural and Johnson
predators: Territorial maintain territories and urine samples were responses in maremma (2015)
enforcement by inclusive of livestock. taken from dingoes sheepdogs. If ‘threat’ was
maremma sheepdogs. That is, whether they housed at the DDC. inside range, they left sheep
do so directly when Sound and scent tests in pursuit of ‘threat’. If ‘threat’
livestock are threatened, were carried out on was outside range, they just
or indirectly (through two sheep properties barked, and scent marked.
sound and scent). with 4 GPS collared Thus, protection appears to
maremma sheepdogs extend beyond the immediate
on each. Cameras were vicinity of livestock, so they do
also set up to record maintain a larger territory.
maremma behavioural
responses.
Dingo semio-chemicals: To assess the viability Urine collected from 6 Identification of 27 chemicals Robley et al.
Towards a non-lethal of the use of semio- sexually mature males were found to be unique (2015)
control tool for the chemicals, extracted at a private property. to dingoes. Dominant male
management of dingoes from dominant male Semio-chemicals urine will cause a behavioural
and wild dogs in dingo urine, as a non- specific to dingoes were response. Utilisation of
Australia. lethal tool in dingo/wild extracted from the extracted semio-chemicals
dog management. above urine samples from male dingo urine appears
and used to test the to be a valuable non-lethal
responses of 14 dingoes tool.
at the DDC.
Fladry as a non-lethal To determine how Exposed 10 dingoes at Minor behavioural reaction. Smith et al.
deterrent for dingoes. captive dingoes the DDC over three Fladry may offer a cost (2019)
responded to fladry (a experimental trials to a effective, temporary barrier,
rope line with brightly 6x6m exclusion zone but aversive effects likely to
coloured flags). lined with fladry. dissipate quickly.
Automated shepherds: To test whether a novel Exposed 12 dingoes Acoustic deterrent was not Smith et al.
Captive dingo acoustic deterrent and at the DDC to two effective. Inflatable effigy highly (2020)
responses to sound and effigy are effective non- conditions (loud gun effective, and remained so
an inflatable, moving lethal deterrents. shots, and an inflatable over multiple exposures (9/36
effigy. moving effigy). Success accessed food across trials).
determined if dingoes
were prevented from
eating from food bowls.
Reproduction Variation in To compare the Literature review used Highlighted the different Lord et al.
and parental reproductive traits parental and to gather parental reproductive strategies (2013)
behaviour of members of the reproductive strategies and reproductive data between domestic and
genus Canis with of domestic and wild for all canids. Captive wild canids across multiple
special attention to the canids. breeding records domains. Dingoes more
domestic dog (Canis collected at the DDC akin to wild than domestic
familiaris). over ten years were canids. Dingoes mate during
used as part of the decreasing daylight (southern
comparison between hemisphere), and wolves
wild and domestic dog during increasing daylight
reproductive timing. (northern hemisphere).
2020
Australian
Zoologist GSmith et al.
Discipline Title Background/Aims Methods Findings Reference
Pattern of nipple use by In relation to suckling Video cameras placed No difference in suckling Hudson et
puppies: A comparison behaviours in altricial inside the den of 4 behaviour was found between al. (2016)
of the Australian dingo young, previously dingo litters (12 puppies domestic dog puppies or
and the domestic dog. studied domestic dog total) at the DDC. dingo puppies. No indication
puppies exhibited no Suckling behaviour that the lack of suckling order
suckling pattern but (including nipple use, is a trait of domestication,
kittens do. Aim was to time and duration of rather reflects a difference in
determine whether the suckling) was observed lifestyles between canids and
difference was due to and coded according to felids.
domestication. 4 measures. Previously
collected data on dog
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
litters was also used.
Diurnal pattern of There is a lack of Continuous camera Evidence of bi-parental care in Hudson et
pre-weaning den visits research looking at early monitoring inside dingoes, and the lack thereof al. (2019)
and nursing in breeding parental care in canids. and outside of 4 in domestic dogs that may be
pairs of captive dingoes This paper aimed to breeding pairs and their attributed to a shift in reliance
(Canis dingo). understand the level of litters at the DDC. on humans. Mothers spent
maternal and paternal Study examined the most of their time in the den
care provided to pre- behaviours (such as nursing, especially at night.
weaned cubs. mother/father time in Fathers slept on top of the
den, nursing time) from den, seemingly to keep guard.
birth to 3 weeks.
Vocalisations The bark, the howl To investigate the Dingo ‘bark-howl’ The ‘howl’ and ‘bark’ Déaux et al.
and the bark-howl: acoustic structure of recordings were components were both (2016a)
Identity cues in dingoes’ ‘bark-howls’ and the collected from two individually distinctive - the
multicomponent calls. behavioural signal ‘bark- sanctuaries, including former to a higher degree.
howls’ represent in the DDC. Wild The ‘bark’ segment may
dingoes. dingoes were tested in function as an initial alert
WA, with recordings to obtain the receivers (i.e.
played during the day/ family member) attention.
night. ‘Bark’ and ‘howl’ Individuality of this vocalisation
components were may inform level of reliability
acoustically measured to the receiver. ‘Bark-howls’
for individuality. may function as alarm calls,
signalling to receivers to be
vigilant.
Concatenation of ‘alert’ To further investigate Dingo ‘bark-howl’ Dingoes were able to Déaux et al.
and ‘identity’ segments the function of ‘bark- recordings were used distinguish levels of familiarity (2016b)
in dingoes’ alarm calls. howls’ in dingoes. from two sanctuaries using the ‘howl’ component;
Aspects studied in NSW. A familiar, they were more responsive
included behavioural unfamiliar and bird to unfamiliar ‘howls’ (potential
responses to level of recording was tested threat) than familiar ‘howls’.
familiarity, attention on 18 dingoes at the ‘Bark’ components served
levels and vigilance DDC. Camera footage to initially attract receiver’s
behaviours. was taken and coded attention, regardless of
according to three familiarity. Dingoes were
behavioural responses; observed to always be vigilant
no. of looks, movement when a ‘bark-howl’ was heard,
towards speaker and supporting its function as an
vigilance. alarm call.
Another example is dominant female infanticide, as and lack of opportunity for individuals to disperse)
reported by Corbett (1988). Corbett (1988) asserted that gave rise to this abnormal behaviour, or at least the
dominant female infanticide was the primary mechanism commonality of it being observed. To date, dominant
through which dingo populations were regulated. The female infanticide has not been reported in wild dingo
main benefit being that mature females that no longer had populations, and in fact, there are more examples of where
young (after their pups had been dispatched by a dominant it does not occur (e.g., Smith and Vague 2017).
female) retained the capacity to suckle and supplementally
feed the dominant female’s dependent young, increasing One final concern when using captive populations
the chances of their survival. However, dominant female for behavioural experiments is the tendency to prefer
infanticide has only been observed in this single captive individuals who are suited to (or tolerate) captivity
population. It is more than likely that the conditions of and human interaction. For example, they do not show
the study site (limited enclosure size, increased aggression, fear response to the experimenter, equipment or testing
H
Australian
Zoologist 2020The contribution of captive dingo populations to scientific research
A) B)
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
C) D)
Figure 3. A sample of research studies conducted at the Dingo Discovery Centre. (a) Testing the response of dingoes
to fladry- Smith et al. 2019. (b) Cortisol sample being taken from a 3-week-old dingo cub- Smith, Flavel, and Simpson
2016. (c) A dingo completing a problem solving task, with Dr Angie Johnston from Yale University. (d) Testing whether
dingoes can follow human social gestures- Smith and Litchfield 2010b (Photo credits: Bradley Smith).
scenario. This is particularly pertinent with dingoes, not appear to have much impact on the expression of
where many in captivity remain timid and exhibit naturalistic parental behaviour. Where possible however,
sensitivity to novelty (neophobia) and are almost always care must be taken to limit the influence of captivity to
excluded from testing (Smith 2015). Excluding such experiments, limitations acknowledged, and caution used
individuals can produce cleaner data (e.g., less failures), when extrapolating findings to free-ranging populations.
but can also lead to false interpretations of cognitive Ideally, all captive based studies should be complemented
ability (Miklósi, Topál, and Csányi 2004). Sample sizes of and verified with studies conducted in wild populations.
captive studies also remain low and tend to use samples
from only one sanctuary/colony (see methods column in
Conclusion
Table 1). Sample size limitations, and the potential for
sanctuary specific behaviours (reflective of the samples By highlighting the contribution of one organisation,
history and genetics, as well as the conditions of the we have shown that a wealth of knowledge can, and
sanctuary) should be acknowledged. will continue to be gained about the dingo from captive
based studies across a number of discipline areas. Any
Despite these important considerations, we argue that of the issues related to captive based research can
the impact and influence of captivity are likely to be be mitigated with sound experimental design, and/or
inconsequential to several disciplines (Smith and Watson acknowledgements of limitations where applicable. There
2015). As shown in Table 1, there are many studies that are many exciting research opportunities and possibilities
can be undertaken with captive populations that have with captive dingoes that can help ensure the long-
few issues or concerns relating to external validity, or term future of the species. For example, facilitating the
appear skewed due to captivity. Given the difficulty in testing of effective non-lethal approaches to mitigate
studying free-ranging dingoes, captive populations remain dingo-livestock conflict, which remains one of the
a valuable resource for scientific studies. For example, biggest challenges to dingo conservation. We conclude
observing parental behaviour in dens is difficult in the by encouraging the recognition, utilisation and support of
wild (especially with replicates), but can be conducted private wildlife sanctuaries and organisations in Australia.
in captivity with ease, and in many ways, and does
2020
Australian
Zoologist ISmith et al.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank all those who have been years. None of this would be possible without them. We
involved with the Australian Dingo Foundation, and also thank two anonymous reviewers and Dan Lunney for
Dingo Discovery Sanctuary and Research Centre over the their valuable feedback and suggestions.
References
Allen, L.R. 2015. Demographic and functional responses of Déaux, E.C., Allen, A.P., Clarke, J.A., and Charrier, I. 2016b.
wild dogs to poison baiting. Ecological Management & Restoration Concatenation of ‘alert’ and ‘identity’ segments in dingoes’ alarm
16: 58-66. doi: doi.org/10.1111/emr.12138 calls. Scientific Reports 6: 30556. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
srep30556
Byosiere, S.E., Espinosa, J., and Smith, B. 2018. The function
of play bows in Canis lupus and its variants: A comparison Edgar, J.P., Appleby, R.G., and Jones, D.N. 2007. Efficacy of
of dingo (Canis lupus dingo), dog (Canis lupus familiaris) and an ultrasonic device as a deterrent to dingoes (Canis lupus dingo):
wolf puppies (Canis lupus). Behaviour 155: 369-388. doi: doi. A preliminary investigation. Journal of Ethology 25: 209-213. doi:
org/10.1163/1568539X-00003495 doi.org/10.1007/s10164-006-0004-1
Cairns, K. M., Shannon, L. M., Koler-Matznick, J., Ballard, Flavel, M. 2012. The effect of age, gender, and antibiotics on
J. W. O., and Boyko, A. R. 2018. Elucidating biogeographical the canine gut microbiome. Unpublished Honours Thesis, La
patterns in Australian native canids using genome wide SNPs. Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC.
PloS ONE 13(6): e0198754. doi: doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0198754 Gese, E. M., Waddell, W. T., Terletzky, P. A., Lucash, C. F.,
McLellan, S. R., and Behrns, S. K. 2018. Cross-fostering as a
Cairns, K. M., Nesbitt, B. J., Laffan, S. W., Letnic, M., and conservation tool to augment endangered carnivore populations.
Crowther, M. S. 2019. Geographic hot spots of dingo genetic Journal of Mammalogy 99: 1033-1041. doi: doi.org/10.1093/
ancestry in southeastern Australia despite hybridisation with jmammal/gyy087
domestic dogs. Conservation Genetics, 1-14. doi: doi.org/10.1007/
s10592-019-01230-z Green, B. 1978. Estimation of food consumption of the dingo,
Canis familiaris dingo, by means of ^(22)Na turnover. Ecology
Catling, P.C. 1979. Seasonal variation in plasma testosterone 59: 207-210. doi: doi.org/10.1111/emr.12138
and testis in captive male dingoes, Canis familiaris dingo.
Australian Journal of Zoology 27: 939-944. doi: doi.org/10.1071/ Hartstone-Rose, A., Selvey, H., Villari, J. R., Atwell, M., and
ZO9790939 Schmidt, T. 2014. The three-dimensional morphological effects
of captivity. PloS ONE 9: e113437. doi: doi.org/10.1371/journal.
Catling, P.C., Corbett, L.K., and Newsome, A.E. 1992. pone.0113437
Reproduction in captive and wild dingoes (Canis familiaris
dingo) in temperate and arid environments of Australia. Wildlife Hill, S. P., and Broom, D. M. 2009. Measuring zoo animal
Research 19: 195-209. doi: doi.org/10.1071/WR9920195 welfare: Theory and practice. Zoo Biology 28: 531-544. doi:
10.1002/zoo.20276
Catling, P.C., Corbett, L.K., and Westcott, M. 1991. Age
determination in the dingo and crossbreeds. Wildlife Research 18: Hudson, R., Rödel, H., Elizalde, M., Arteaga, L., Kennedy,
75-83. doi: doi.org/10.1071/WR9910075 G., and Smith, B. 2016. Pattern of nipple use by puppies:
A comparison of the Australian dingo and the domestic dog.
Corbett, L. 1988. Social dynamics of a captive dingo pack: Journal of Comparative Psychology 130: 269-277. doi: doi.
Population regulation by dominant female infanticide. Ecology org/10.1037/com0000023
78: 177-198. doi: doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1988.tb00229.x
Hudson R., Elizalde M., Kennedy G., Rödel, H., and Smith
Corbett, L. K., and Newsome, A. E. 1975. Dingo society and B. 2019. Diurnal pattern of pre-weaning den visits and nursing
its maintenance: A preliminary analysis. Pp. 369-79 in The Wild in breeding pairs of captive dingoes (Canis dingo). Mammalian
Canids. Their Systematics, Behavioural Ecology and Evolution, Biology 94: 86-91. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2018.07.002
edited by M.W. Fox. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, NY.
Johnston, A.M., Holden, P.C., and Santos, L.R. 2016.
Corbett, L.K. 2001. The dingo in Australia and Asia. JB Books, Exploring the evolutionary origins of overimitation: A
Marleston, SA. comparison across domesticated canids. Developmental Science
20: e12460. doi: doi.org/10.1111/desc.12460
Déaux, E.C., Charrier, I. and Clarke, J.A. 2016a. The
bark, the howl and the bark-howl: Identity cues in dingoes’
multicomponent calls. Behavioural Processes 129: 94-100. doi:
doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2016.06.012
J
Australian
Zoologist 2020The contribution of captive dingo populations to scientific research
Johnston, A., Turrin, C., Watson, L., Arre, A., and Santos, Newsome, T.M., Ballard, G.A., Crowther, M.S., Dellinger, J.A.,
L.R. 2017. Uncovering the origins of dog–human eye contact: Fleming, P.J., Glen, A.S., ... and Nimmo, D.G. 2015. Resolving
Dingoes establish eye contact more than wolves, but less than the value of the dingo in ecological restoration. Restoration
dogs. Animal Behaviour 133: 123-129. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j. Ecology 23: 201-208. doi: doi.org/10.1111/rec.12186
anbehav.2017.09.002
O’Regan, H.J., and Kitchener, A.C. 2005. The effects of
Kershenbaum, A., Root-Gutteridge, H., Habib, B., Koler- captivity on the morphology of captive, domesticated and feral
Matznick, J., Mitchell, B., Palacios, V., and Waller, S. mammals. Mammal Review 35: 215-230. doi: doi.org/10.1111/
2016. Disentangling canid howls across multiple species and j.1365-2907.2005.00070.x
subspecies: Structure in a complex communication channel.
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
Behavioural Processes 124: 149-157. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j. Parsons, M.H., and Blumstein, D.T. 2010. Familiarity
beproc.2016.01.006 breeds contempt: Kangaroos persistently avoid areas with
experimentally deployed dingo scents. PLOS ONE 5. doi: doi.
Klinghammer, E., and Goodmann, P.A. 1987. Socialisation org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010403
and management of wolves in captivity. Pp. 31-59 in Man and
Wolf, edited by H Frank. Dr W. Junk Publishers, Dordrecht, Reynolds, J.E., Dortch, J., and Balme, J. 2016. Dingo scat-
Netherlands. bone ‘signature patterns’: An actualistic study and comparison
of wild and captive scat-bone assemblages and interpretation of
Koungoulos, L., Faulkner, P., and Asmussen, B. 2018. bone fragments from Witchcliffe Rock Shelter, south western
Analysis of pit and score tooth-mark sizes from bones modified Australia. Australian Archaeology 82: 218-231. doi: doi.org/10.10
by Holocene Australian terrestrial fauna in relation to body 80/03122417.2016.1240136
size. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 20: 271-283. doi:
doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2018.05.006 Ritchie, E. G., Elmhagen, B., Glen, A. S., Letnic, M., Ludwig,
G., and McDonald, R. A. 2012. Ecosystem restoration with
Lord, K., Feinstein, M., Smith, B., and Coppinger, R. 2013. teeth: what role for predators? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 27:
Variation in reproductive traits of members of the genus Canis 265-271. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.01.001
with special attention to the domestic dog (Canis familiaris).
Behavioural Processes 92: 131-142. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j. Robley, A., Lindeman, M., Cook, I., Woodford, L., and
beproc.2012.10.009 Moloney, P. 2015. Dingo semiochemicals: Towards a non-lethal
control tool for the management of dingoes and wild dogs in
McAuliffe, K.J. 2013. The Evolution and Development of Australia. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research,
Inequity Aversion. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Harvard Technical Report Series No. 263, Victoria.
University, MA.
Schenkel, R. 1947. Expression studies of the wolf. Behaviour 1:
Mech, L.D. 1970. The wolf: Ecology and behaviour of an 81-129. doi: doi.org/10.1163/156853948X00065
endangered species. Natural History Press, New York, NY.
Smith B., and Litchfield, C. 2010a. How well do dingoes
Miklósi, A., Kubinyi, E., Topál, J., Gácsi, M., Virányi, Z., and (Canis dingo) perform on the detour task. Animal Behaviour 80:
Csányi, V. 2003. A simple reason for a big difference: Wolves do 155-162. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.04.017
not look back at humans, but dogs do. Current Biology 13: 763-
766. doi: doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9822(03)00263-X Smith, B., and Litchfield, C. 2010b. Dingoes (Canis dingo) can
use human social cues to locate hidden food. Animal Cognition
Miklósi, A., Topál, J., and Csányi, V. 2004. Comparative social 13: 367-376. doi: doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0287-z
cognition: What can dogs teach us? Animal Behaviour 67: 995-
1004. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.10.008 Smith, B., Appleby, R., and Litchfield, C. 2012. Spontaneous
tool-use: An observation of a dingo (Canis dingo) using a table
Morrant, D. 2015. Chasing the yellow dog’s tale: The science to access an out-of-reach food reward. Behavioural Processes 89:
of studying dingoes. Pp. 159-190 in The dingo debate: origins, 219-224. doi: doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2011.11.004
behaviour and conservation, edited by B. Smith. CSIRO
Publishing, Melbourne, VIC. Smith, B., and Litchfield, C. 2013. Looking back at
‘looking back’: Operationalizing referential gaze for dingoes
Newsome, A.E., Corbett, L.K., Best, L.W., and Green, B. in an unsolvable task. Animal Cognition 16: 961-971. doi: doi.
1972. The dingo. Australian Meat Research Committee Review org/10.1007/s10071-013-0629-8
14: 1-11.
Smith, B. 2015. Dingo intelligence: A dingo’s brain is sharper
Newsome, A.E., and Corbett, L. 1982. The identity of the than it’s teeth. Pp. 215–249 in The dingo debate: Origins,
dingo. II. Hybridisation with domestic dogs in captivity and behaviour and conservation, edited by B. Smith. CSIRO
in the wild. Australian Journal of Zoology 28: 615-625. doi: doi. Publishing, Melbourne, VIC.
org/10.1071/ZO9820365
2020
Australian
Zoologist KSmith et al.
Smith, B., and Appleby, R. 2015. Forging a new future Tribe, A. 2001. Captive wildlife tourism in Australia (Vol. 14).
for the Australian dingo. Pp. 301–315 in The dingo debate: Gold Coast, Australia: CRC for Sustainable Tourism.
Origins, behaviour and conservation, edited by B. Smith.
CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, VIC. Tribe, A., and Booth, R. 2003. Assessing the role of zoos in
wildlife conservation. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 8: 65-74.
Smith, B., and Watson, L. 2015. The role of private sanctuaries
in dingo conservation and the management of dingoes in van Bommel, L., and Johnson, C.N. 2015. How guardian
captivity. Pp. 277–299 in The dingo debate: origins, behaviour dogs protect livestock from predators: Territorial enforcement by
and conservation, edited by B. Smith. CSIRO Publishing, Maremma sheepdogs. Wildlife Research 41: 662-672. doi: https://
Melbourne, VIC. doi.org/10.1071/WR14190
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/australian-zoologist/article-pdf/doi/10.7882/AZ.2020.023/2645716/10.7882_az.2020.023.pdf by guest on 12 December 2020
Smith, B., Flavel, M., and Simpson, B. 2016. Quantification Ward, S. J., and Melfi, V. 2015. Keeper-animal interactions:
of salivary cortisol from captive dingoes (Canis dingo) in relation Differences between the behaviour of zoo animals affect
to age, gender, and breeding season. Australian Mammalogy 38: stockmanship. PloS one, 10(10). doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/
21-28. doi: doi.org/10.1071/AM15017 journal.pone.0140237
Smith, B., and Vague, A-L. 2017. The denning behaviour of Wilton, A.N., Steward, D.J., and Zafiris, K. 1999. Microsatellite
dingoes (Canis dingo) living in a human-modified environment. variation in the Australian dingo. Journal of Heredity 90: 108-
Australian Mammalogy 39: 161-168. doi: doi.org/10.1071/ 111. doi: doi.org/10.1093/jhered/90.1.108
AM16027
Wilton, A.N. 2001. DNA methods of assessing dingo purity. Pp.
Smith, B., Moore, R., Appleby, R., and Blacker, A. 2019. 49–56 in A Symposium on the Dingo, edited by C.R. Dickman
Fladry as a non-lethal deterrent for dingoes. Poster presented and D. Lunney. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales,
at the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales special Mossman, NSW.
forum, ‘The dingo dilemma: cull, contain or conserve’. Sydney,
Australia. September 7, 2019.
Smith, B., Jaques, N., Appleby, R., Morris, S., and Jordan,
N. (2020). Automated shepherds: Captive dingo responses
to sound and an inflatable, moving effigy. Pacific Conservation
Biology, in press.
L
Australian
Zoologist 2020You can also read
