Do females use their sexual status to gain resource access? Investigating food-for-sex in wolves and dogs

Intra and interspecific audience effect on domestic dogs' behavioural displays and facial expressions

The aim of the current study was to investigate the influence of both intra- and interspecific audiences on dogs' facial expressions and behaviours. Forty-six dogs were exposed to three test conditions in which a food reward, initially available, was denied when in the presence of either a human (Human condition) or a dog audience (Dog condition), or in the absence of a visible audience (Non-social condition). Salivary cortisol was collected to evaluate the stress/arousal activation in the different conditions. Compared to the Non-social condition, the presence of a conspecific evoked more facial expressions, according to the DogFACS (Facial Action Coding System, an anatomically based tool to analyze facial expressions in domestic dogs), (EAD105-Ears downward), displacement behaviours (AD137-Nose licking, AD37-Lip wiping), tail wagging, whining, and panting (AD126). When facing a conspecific, dogs assumed a more avoidant attitude, keeping a distance and not looking at the stimuli, compared to when in the presence of the human partner. Dogs also exhibited more facial expressions (EAD102-Ears Adductor, EAD104-Ears Rotator), displacement behaviours (AD137-Nose licking, AD37-Lip wiping), panting (AD126) and whining when facing the conspecific than the human partner. Post-test cortisol was not influenced by any condition, and no association between pre-test cortisol and behavioural variables was found, thus strong differences in the levels of stress/arousal were unlikely to be responsible for differences in behavior between conditions. Considering the current results in the context of the available literature, we suggest that the higher displacement behaviors exhibited with the conspecifics were likely due to an increased level of uncertainty regarding the situations.

No evidence for a relationship between breed cooperativeness and inequity aversion in dogs

Inequity aversion, the resistance to inequitable outcomes, has been demonstrated in a wide variety of animal species. Inequity aversion was hypothesised to have co-evolved with cooperation but only limited evidence supports this. Dogs provide a suitable model species to test this hypothesis as dogs were previously shown to be inequity averse and dog breeds vary in the extent to which they were selected for cooperativeness. Here, we compared the response of 12 individuals of "cooperative worker" breeds with that of 12 individuals of "independent worker" breeds in the "paw task" previously used to demonstrate inequity aversion in dogs. We also compared the two breed groups' subsequent social behaviours in a food tolerance test and free interaction session. Although subjects in both breed groups were inequity averse, we found no considerable difference between the groups in the extent of the negative response to inequity or in the impact of the inequity on subsequent social behaviours. However, we found differences between the breed groups in the response to reward omission with cooperative breeds tending to work for longer than independent breeds. Additionally, in the free interaction session, individuals of cooperative breeds spent more time in proximity to their partner in the baseline condition than individuals of independent breeds. Overall, our results do not provide support for the hypothesis that inequity aversion and cooperation co-evolved. However, they illuminate potential differences in selection pressures experienced by cooperative worker and independent worker dog breeds throughout their evolutionary history.

The effect of domestication on post-conflict management: wolves reconcile while dogs avoid each other

Highly cooperative social species are expected to engage in frequent reconciliation following conflicts in order to maintain pack cohesiveness and preserve future cooperation. By contrast, in social species with low reliance on cooperation, reconciliation is expected to be less frequent. Here, we investigate the pattern of reconciliation in four captive wolf packs and four captive dog packs. We provide evidence for reconciliation in captive wolves, which are highly dependent on cooperation between pack members, while domestic dogs, which rely on conspecific cooperation less than wolves, avoided interacting with their partners after conflicts. Occurrence, intensity, latency, duration and initiation of wolf reconciliations appeared to vary as a consequence of a compromise between the costs (e.g. risk of further aggression) and the benefits (e.g. restoring relationship with opponents) of such interactions. Our results are in line with previous findings on various wolf packs living under different social and ecological conditions, suggesting that reconciliation is an important strategy for maintaining functional relationships and pack cohesiveness. However, current results on dogs are in contrast to the only other study showing that reconciliation can occur also in this species. Therefore, the occurrence of reconciliation in dogs may be influenced by social and environmental conditions more than in wolves. Which factors promote and modulate reconciliation in dogs needs to be further investigated.

The influence of social relationship on food tolerance in wolves and dogs

ABSTRACT

Food sharing is relatively widespread across the animal kingdom, but research into the socio-ecological factors affecting this activity has predominantly focused on primates. These studies do suggest though that food tolerance is linked to the social relationship with potential partners. Therefore, the current study aimed to assess the social factors which influence food tolerance in two canids: wolves and dogs. We presented wolves and dogs with two paradigms: dyadic tolerance tests and group carcass feedings. In the dyadic setting, the affiliative relationship with a partner was the most important factor, with a strong bond promoting more sharing in both species. In the group setting, however, rank was the primary factor determining feeding behavior. Although the dominant individuals of both species defended the carcass more than subordinates, in the dogs, the subordinates mostly stayed away from the resource and the most dominant individual monopolized the food. In the wolves, the subordinates spent as much time as dominant individuals in proximity to, and feeding from, the carcass. Furthermore, subordinate wolves were more able to use persistence strategies than the dogs were. Feeding interactions in the wolves, but not dogs, were also modulated by whether the carcass was on the ground or hanging from a tree. Overall, the social relationship with a partner is important in food distribution in wolves and dogs, but the precise effects are dependent on species and feeding context. We consider how the different socio-ecologies of the two species may be linked to these findings.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

Despite the fact that food sharing is relatively widespread in the animal kingdom, the specific factors underlying whether an animal will share with a specific individual are little understood. When it comes to decisions about food sharing in wolves and dogs, friendship is the deciding factor if it is just two of you, but in a bigger group rank position decides your access to the spoils. What is more, it seems that rank positioning is even more important in dogs than wolves as dominant dogs keep the food for themselves while each wolf pack member has a chance to eat. This is the first evidence that the importance of the social relationship in food sharing is dependent on the feeding context in canids.