Animal Behavior for Shelter Veterinarians and Staff. Группа авторов. Читать онлайн. Newlib. NEWLIB.NET

Автор: Группа авторов
Издательство: John Wiley & Sons Limited
Серия:
Жанр произведения: Биология
Год издания: 0
isbn: 9781119618508
Скачать книгу
member to present a chapter at a staff meeting, or build a volunteer training session using material gleaned from your favorite chapter—choose whichever means of applying this material will most enrich you, the animals, and the people in your circles. After all, there is bound to be something valuable for everyone, because everyone is on the behavior team!

       Julie Hecht and Alexandra Horowitz

      The domestic dog, Canis familiaris, is a member of the Canidae family, genus Canis, which also includes wolves, coyotes, and jackals. Canis lupus, the present‐day gray wolf, is the domestic dog’s closest living ancestor (Vilà et al. 1997), and the divergence began more than 10,000 years ago, possibly with early hunter‐gatherers and then in association with early agriculture (vonHoldt and Driscoll 2017). The dog is the only domesticated species of the genus: that is to say, the only canid for whom artificial selection (selective breeding) by humans has usurped natural selection as a major mover of the species.

      Considering dog behavior in the context of their wild cousins can at times clarify some common dog behavior. Wolves living among family members approach and greet those returning from hunting by licking—“kissing”—their faces. Licks are prompts for the wolf to regurgitate some of the kill just ingested. Similarly, a dog's “kiss” is a greeting, but it is also a vestigial interest in whatever it was an owner might have consumed since leaving the house (Horowitz 2009b). A dog's propensity to sniff peoples’ genital area could be viewed as intrusive or “impolite,” yet it is analogous to canids' olfactory investigations of the genital and anal areas of conspecifics, which contain information about the identification, and perhaps recent activities and health, of that individual (Sommerville and Broom 1998). At the same time, there are numerous differences between dogs and wolves, particularly regarding ecological niche and social organization (Marshall‐Pescini et al. 2017), and analogies between the two should be made with caution. Instead, dogs’ intimate association with humans has had a seminal impact on every aspect of their being.

      Canis familiaris and Homo sapiens share a special relationship. They engage in the seemingly mundane—walking side by side in a park—to the complex—running an agility course or alerting a hearing‐impaired person to a ringing telephone. In recent years, cognitive, behavioral, and physiological studies have added clarity to this unique interspecific bond.

      1.2.1 Dog Interspecific Social Cognition

      1.2.2 Dog‐Human Relationships

      Attachment theory initially described the affectionate bond relating to safety, security, and protection between a child and caregiver, and it has since been extended to and identified between dogs and their caretakers (Bowlby 1958; Topál et al. 1998). Attachment is displayed through particular behaviors such as proximity maintenance, approach, and gaze toward a caregiver when reunited. Similar to infants, dogs display the “secure base effect” by exploring and playing more in a novel environment when in the presence of an owner than a stranger (Horn et al. 2013). Like the child‐parent relationship, dogs can display different attachment styles described broadly as secure (explore and also seek contact) or insecure (avoidant, ambivalent, or disorganized) (Solomon et al. 2019). Dog attachment style and owner caregiving strategies both contribute to the dyad’s relationship (Rehn and Keeling 2016).

      Early exposure to humans is important for normal dog social development, but attachment relationships can form later in life, multiple times, and toward multiple people. Gácsi et al. (2001) found that similar to owned dogs, shelter dogs displayed attachment behaviors toward a newly appointed “owner” (designated by three short interactions with the dog). Thielke and Udell (2020) found that, similar to owned dogs, dogs in foster care formed secure attachments, and leaving the shelter seems to further support relationship development. If adopters are concerned about shelter dogs forming bonds, these studies could provide comfort.

      Biological mechanisms could also underpin the dog‐human relationship. The neurohormone oxytocin is often highlighted for its role in bonding and affiliation, good feelings, and stress buffering. Studies find that pleasurable interactions such as gentle petting, light play, talking in a positive tone, greeting, and sharing gaze with a known person promote oxytocin release in both dogs and people (Kis et al. 2017; Powell et al. 2019b). Although oxytocin appears to contribute to the dog‐human relationship, a positive oxytocin effect is not always observed (Powell et al. 2019a).

      1.2.3 Relationships between Dogs

      Dog relationships with conspecifics may differ from those formed with humans, and research in this area is in its infancy. Behavioral indicators of attachment toward the dam have been identified and, in some circumstances, the stress response can be reduced by the presence of a cohabitant dog (Mariti et al. 2014, 2017). Cimarelli et al. (2019) suggest that it is the individuals involved, not the species type, who impact the quality of the bond. They observed that while referencing/information seeking was more often found in dog‐human relationships, both dog‐dog and dog‐human relationships shared similarities in terms of affiliation and stress alleviation