Scent-Mark Identification and Scent-Marking Behaviour in African Wild Dogs (Lycaon pictus)

Scent-marking is common in mammals, but where signals are carried by urine and faeces, distinguishing between scent-marking and mere elimination is problematic. To do so, we documented behaviours and context variables associated with urination and defecation in free-ranging endangered African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) and tested whether these were related to the responses of other dogs to deposits. We found that distinct postures were almost uniquely associated with deposits by dominant wild dogs, were more common during urination than defecation, and increased the likelihood that these deposits would be investigated by other wild dogs. The likelihood of investigation depended on the sex and dominance status of the depositor, the type of deposit and the substrate. Urine from dominant females was more likely to be investigated by other wild dogs than any other deposits, and deposits placed on vegetation were more likely to be investigated than those on bare ground. The likelihood that a deposit would be overmarked was affected by the deposit type and the sex and dominance status of the last depositor. Collectively, these results suggest that dominant wild dog urine is of greatest interest to other dogs. Our results show that some deposits by African wild dogs are not scent-marks and that detailed observations of behaviours and context variables during elimination events can be used to distinguish deposits that are likely to be of communication value.

[1]  Allison C. Alberts,et al.  Constraints on the Design of Chemical Communication Systems in Terrestrial Vertebrates , 1992, The American Naturalist.

[2]  R. Johnston,et al.  Female voles discriminate males' over-marks and prefer top-scent males , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[3]  R. Woodroffe,et al.  Ranging behaviour of African wild dog packs in a human‐dominated landscape , 2011 .

[4]  E. Natoli,et al.  Scent‐Marking Behaviour in a Pack of Free‐Ranging Domestic Dogs , 2012 .

[5]  I. Barja.  Decision making in plant selection during the faecal-marking behaviour of wild wolves , 2009, Animal Behaviour.

[6]  H. Kruuk,et al.  The aardwolf (Proteles cristatm Sparrman) 1783 as predator of termites , 1972 .

[7]  D. Macdonald,et al.  Scent‐marking and territorial behaviour of Ethiopian wolves Canis simensis , 1998 .

[8]  S. Collins,et al.  The response of subordinate male mice to scent marks varies in relation to their own competitive ability , 1996, Animal Behaviour.

[9]  M. Manser,et al.  Scent marking in wild banded mongooses: 1. Sex-specific scents and overmarking , 2011, Animal Behaviour.

[10]  Andrew A. Pierce,et al.  Perspectives on over-marking: is it good to be on top? , 2007, Journal of Ethology.

[11]  H. Akaike.  A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[12]  L. Mech,et al.  The influence of social and endocrine factors on urine-marking by captive wolves (Canis lupus) , 1990, Hormones and Behavior.

[13]  J. Hurst,et al.  The competing countermarks hypothesis: reliable assessment of competitive ability by potential mates , 1999, Animal Behaviour.

[14]  I. Barja,et al.  The importance of crossroads in faecal marking behaviour of the wolves (Canis lupus) , 2004, Naturwissenschaften.

[15]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Multimodel Inference , 2004 .

[16]  N. Jordan.  Scent-marking investment is determined by sex and breeding status in meerkats , 2007, Animal Behaviour.

[17]  T. Clutton‐Brock,et al.  Responses to intruder scents in the cooperatively breeding meerkat: sex and social status differences and temporal variation , 2011 .

[18]  J. Mcnutt,et al.  Sex-biased dispersal in African wild dogs, Lycaon pictus , 1996, Animal Behaviour.

[19]  C. Snowdon,et al.  Effects of sex, social status and gonadectomy on countermarking by domestic dogs, Canis familiaris , 2011, Animal Behaviour.

[20]  S. Creel,et al.  The African Wild Dog: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation , 2002 .

[21]  M. Ferkin.  Meadow Voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus, Arvicolidae) Over-mark and Adjacent-mark the Scent Marks of Same-sex Conspecifics , 1999 .

[22]  M. S. Gunther,et al.  Reproductive sharing and proximate factors mediating cooperative breeding in the African wild dog (Lycaon pictus) , 2010, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[23]  K. Marten,et al.  Natural selection and the communal rearing of pups in African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) , 1982, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[24]  R. Johnston,et al.  The information in scent over-marks of golden hamsters , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[25]  J. Altmann,et al.  Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. , 1974, Behaviour.

[26]  Peters Rp,et al.  Scent-marking in wolves , 1975 .

[27]  Heribert Hofer,et al.  Does anal gland scent signal identity in the spotted hyaena? , 2009, Animal Behaviour.

[28]  R. Ruff,et al.  Scent-marking by coyotes, Canis latrans : the influence of social and ecological factors , 1997, Animal Behaviour.

[29]  L. Mech,et al.  Scent-marking in lone wolves and newly formed pairs , 1979, Animal Behaviour.

[30]  M. Gorman,et al.  Factors Affecting the Density and Distribution of Wild Dogs in the Kruger National Park , 1997 .

[31]  Devra G. Kleiman,et al.  Olfactory Communication in Mammals , 1972 .

[32]  M. Parker.  Territoriality and Scent Marking Behavior of African Wild Dogs in Northern Botswana , 2010 .

[33]  P. Richardson,et al.  Responses of aardwolves,Proteles cristatus, Sparrman 1783, to translocated scent marks , 1998, Animal Behaviour.

[34]  I. Barja,et al.  Faecal marking behaviour of Iberian wolf in different zones of their territory , 2005 .