Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
DrChrissy (talk | contribs)
Extended confirmed users
21,946 edits
→‎References: fixed reference
DrChrissy (talk | contribs)
Extended confirmed users
21,946 edits
→‎Cognition: removed material not related to cognition, moved remaining content to better place
Line 15: Line 15:
{{Further|Animal cognition}}
{{Further|Animal cognition}}


Cognition describes the mental capacities of animals. Dogs have frequently been used in studies on cognition, for example, in the learning processes of [[Classical conditioning|classical]] and [[operant conditioning]]. As with many animals, the cognitive capacities of dogs are affected by both genetic and environmental factors<ref name=coren2004/> as expressed in the "[[nature versus nurture]]" debate.
Cognition describes the mental capacities of animals. Dogs have frequently been used in studies on cognition, for example, in the learning processes of [[Classical conditioning|classical]] and [[operant conditioning]]. As with many animals, the cognitive capacities of dogs are affected by both genetic and environmental factors<ref name=coren2004/> as expressed in the "[[nature versus nurture]]" debate. The great majority of modern research on dog cognition has focused on pet dogs living in human homes in developed countries. This is only a small minority of the domestic dog population and dogs from other populations may show quantifiably different cognitive behavior towards humans.<ref name=udell2010/>


As the oldest domesticated species, the cognitive capacities of dogs inevitably have been shaped by millennia of contact with humans.<ref name=shipman2011/><ref name=bradshaw2011/> As a result of this physical and social evolution, dogs have acquired an ability to understand and communicate with humans. Research in canine cognition is revealing the range and variability of skills such as following pointing and gaze cues,<ref name=hare2002/><ref name=hare2005/><ref name=teglas2012/> fast mapping of novel words,<ref name=kaminski2004/> [[cognitive bias in animals|cognitive bias]]<ref name="Mendl2010" /> and the possibility that dogs have other emotions.<ref name=bekoff2007/>
As the oldest domesticated species, the cognitive capacities of dogs inevitably have been shaped by millennia of contact with humans.<ref name=shipman2011/><ref name=bradshaw2011/> As a result of this physical and social evolution, dogs have acquired an ability to understand and communicate with humans. Research in canine cognition is revealing the range and variability of skills such as following pointing and gaze cues,<ref name=hare2002/><ref name=hare2005/><ref name=teglas2012/> fast mapping of novel words,<ref name=kaminski2004/> [[cognitive bias in animals|cognitive bias]]<ref name="Mendl2010" /> and the possibility that dogs have other emotions.<ref name=bekoff2007/>

It is estimated that there are one billion dogs on the planet, with pet dogs in developed countries representing 17-24% of the total.<ref name=lord2012/> In the developing world pet dogs are uncommon, but feral, village or community dogs are plentiful around humans.<ref name=coppinger2001/> These live their lives as scavengers and have never been owned by humans, with one study showing their most common response when approached by strangers was to run away (52%) or respond with aggression (11%).<ref name=ortolani2009/> We know little about these dogs, nor about the dogs that live in developed countries that are feral, stray or are in shelters, yet the great majority of modern research on dog cognition has focused on pet dogs living in human homes in developed countries. This is only a small minority of the domestic dog population and dogs from other populations may show quantifiably different behavior towards humans.<ref name=udell2010/>


In a problem solving experiment dominant dogs generally performed better than subordinate ones, but only when they observed a human demonstrator’s action. This suggests that social rank affects performance in social learning situations and that in social groups with clear hierarchy, dominant individuals will be the more influential demonstrators and the knowledge transfer will, therefore, be unidirectional. If dog-human groups are regarded as social units with some type of internal hierarchy, humans are usually considered as the leaders. In this scenario, the human will be the most influential demonstrator for the dominant dog. The subordinate dogs will learn better from the dominant dog that is next in the hierarchy.<ref name=pongracz2012/>
In a problem solving experiment dominant dogs generally performed better than subordinate ones, but only when they observed a human demonstrator’s action. This suggests that social rank affects performance in social learning situations and that in social groups with clear hierarchy, dominant individuals will be the more influential demonstrators and the knowledge transfer will, therefore, be unidirectional. If dog-human groups are regarded as social units with some type of internal hierarchy, humans are usually considered as the leaders. In this scenario, the human will be the most influential demonstrator for the dominant dog. The subordinate dogs will learn better from the dominant dog that is next in the hierarchy.<ref name=pongracz2012/>

Revision as of 12:56, 20 April 2015

Dogs roughhousing.

Dog behavior is the range of actions and mannerisms made by the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, in conjunction with themselves or their environment, which includes other organisms as well as the inanimate physical environment. It is the response of dogs to various stimuli or inputs, whether internal or external, conscious or subconscious, overt or covert, and voluntary or involuntary.

Evolution/Domestication/Co-evolution with humans

Main article: Origin of the domestic dog

The origin of the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris or Canis familiaris) is not clear. Nuclear DNA evidence points to a single domestication 11,000-16,000 years ago that predates the rise of agriculture and implies that the earliest dogs arose along with hunter-gatherers and not agriculturists.[1] Mitochondrial DNA evidence points to a domestication 18,800-32,100 years ago and that all modern dogs are most closely related to ancient wolf fossils that have been found in Europe,[2][3] compared to earlier hypotheses which proposed origins in Eurasia as well as Eastern Asia.[4][5][6] The 2 recent genetic analyses indicate that the dog is not a descendant of the extant (i.e. living) gray wolf but forms a sister clade, that the ancestor is an extinct wolf-like canid and the dog's genetic closeness to modern wolves is due to admixture.[1][7]

How dogs became domesticated is not clear, however the two main hypothesis are self-domestication or human domestication.

There exists evidence of human-canine coevolution.

Cognition

Further information: Animal cognition

Cognition describes the mental capacities of animals. Dogs have frequently been used in studies on cognition, for example, in the learning processes of classical and operant conditioning. As with many animals, the cognitive capacities of dogs are affected by both genetic and environmental factors[8] as expressed in the "nature versus nurture" debate. The great majority of modern research on dog cognition has focused on pet dogs living in human homes in developed countries. This is only a small minority of the domestic dog population and dogs from other populations may show quantifiably different cognitive behavior towards humans.[9]

As the oldest domesticated species, the cognitive capacities of dogs inevitably have been shaped by millennia of contact with humans.[10][11] As a result of this physical and social evolution, dogs have acquired an ability to understand and communicate with humans. Research in canine cognition is revealing the range and variability of skills such as following pointing and gaze cues,[12][13][14] fast mapping of novel words,[15] cognitive bias[16] and the possibility that dogs have other emotions.[17]

In a problem solving experiment dominant dogs generally performed better than subordinate ones, but only when they observed a human demonstrator’s action. This suggests that social rank affects performance in social learning situations and that in social groups with clear hierarchy, dominant individuals will be the more influential demonstrators and the knowledge transfer will, therefore, be unidirectional. If dog-human groups are regarded as social units with some type of internal hierarchy, humans are usually considered as the leaders. In this scenario, the human will be the most influential demonstrator for the dominant dog. The subordinate dogs will learn better from the dominant dog that is next in the hierarchy.[18]

Senses

Further information: Dog § senses

Vision

Frequency sensitivity compared with humans.

Like most mammals, dogs have only two types of cone photoreceptor, making them dichromats.[19][20][21][22] These cone cells are maximally sensitive between 429 nm and 555 nm. Behavioural studies have shown that the dog's visual world consists of yellows, blues and grays,[22] but they have difficulty differentiating red and green making their color vision equivalent to red–green color blindness in humans (deuteranopia). When a human perceives an object as "red", this object appears as "yellow" to the dog and the human perception of "green" appears as "white", a shade of gray. This white region (the neutral point) occurs around 480 nm, the part of the spectrum which appears blue-green to humans. For dogs, wavelengths longer than the neutral point cannot be distinguished from each other and all appear as yellow.[22]

The dog's visual system has evolved to aid proficient hunting.[19] While a dog's visual acuity is poor (that of a poodle's has been estimated to translate to a Snellen rating of 20/75[19]), their visual discrimination for moving objects is very high; dogs have been shown to be able to discriminate between humans (e.g., identifying their human guardian) at a range of between 800 and 900 metres (2,600 and 3,000 ft), however this range decreases to 500–600 metres (1,600–2,000 ft) if the object is stationary.[19]

Olfaction

While the human brain is dominated by a large visual cortex, the dog brain is dominated by an olfactory cortex. The olfactory bulb in dogs is roughly forty times bigger than the olfactory bulb in humans, relative to total brain size, with 125 to 220 million smell-sensitive receptors. The bloodhound exceeds this standard with nearly 300 million receptors.[8]

Hearing

Anatomy of the ear.

The frequency range of dog hearing is approximately 40 Hz to 60,000 Hz,[23] which means that dogs can detect sounds far beyond the upper limit of the human auditory spectrum.[21][23][24] In addition, dogs have ear mobility, which allows them to rapidly pinpoint the exact location of a sound.[25] Eighteen or more muscles can tilt, rotate, raise, or lower a dog's ear. The ears are often used in communication of, for example, the dog's mood.[citation needed] A dog can identify a sound's location much faster than a human can, as well as hear sounds at four times the distance.[25]

Social behavior

Further information: Dog communication

Play

Dog-dog

Playtime

Play between dogs usually involves several behaviours that are often seen in aggressive encounters, for example, nipping, biting, growling and biting. It is therefore important for the dogs to place these behaviours in the context of play, rather than aggression. Dogs signal their intent to play with a range of behaviours including a "play-bow", "face-paw" "open-mouthed play face" and postures inviting the other dog to chase the initiator. Similar signals are given throughout the play bout to maintain the context of the potentially aggressive activities.[26]

From a young age, dogs engage in play with one another. Dog play is made up primarily of mock fights. It is believed that this behavior, which is most common in puppies, is training for important behaviors later in life. Play between puppies is not necessarily a 50:50 symmetry of dominant and submissive roles between the individuals; dogs who engage in greater rates of dominant behaviours (e.g. chasing, forcing partners down) at later ages also initiate play at higher rates. This could imply that winning during play becomes more important as puppies mature.[27]

Dog-human

The motivation for a dog to play with another dog is distinct from that of a dog playing with a human. Dogs walked together with opportunities to play with one another, play with their owners with the same frequency as dogs being walked alone. Dogs in households with two or more dogs play more often with their owners than dogs in households with a single dog, indicating the motivation to play with other dogs does not substitute for the motivation to play with humans.[28]

It is a common misconception that winning and losing games such as "tug-of-war" and "rough-and-tumble" can can influence a dog's dominance relationship with humans. Rather, the way in which dogs play indicates their temperament and relationship with their owner. Dogs that play rough-and-tumble are more amenable and show lower separation anxiety than dogs which play other types of games, and dogs playing tug-of-war and "fetch" are more confident. Dogs which start the majority of games are less amenable and more likely to be aggressive.[29]

Playing with humans can affect the cortisol levels of dogs. In one study, the cortisol responses of police dogs and border guard dogs was assessed after playing with their handlers. The cortisol concentrations of the police dogs increased, whereas the border guard dogs' hormone levels decreased. The researchers noted that during the play sessions, police officers were disciplining their dogs, whereas the border guards were truly playing with them, i.e this included bonding and affectionate behaviours. They commented that several studies have shown that behaviours associated with control, authority or aggression increase cortisol, whereas play and affiliative behaviour decrease cortisol levels.[30]

Empathy

In 2012, a study found that dogs oriented toward their owner or a stranger more often when the person was pretending to cry than when they were talking or humming. When the stranger pre-tended to cry, rather than approaching their usual source of comfort, their owner, dogs sniffed, nuzzled and licked the stranger instead. The dogs’ pattern of response was behaviorally consistent with an expression of empathic concern.[31]

Personalities

Several personality traits in dogs are recognised. These include "Playfulness", "Curiosity/Fearlessness, "Chase-proneness", "Sociability and Aggressiveness" and "Shyness–Boldness".[32][33]

Leadership, dominance and social groups

Follow the leader

Dominance is a descriptive term for the relationships between pairs of individuals. Among ethologists, dominance is normally defined as ‘‘an attribute of the pattern of repeated, agonistic interactions between two individuals, characterized by a consistent outcome in favor of the same dyad member and a default yielding response of its opponent rather than escalation. The status of the consistent winner is dominant and that of the loser subordinate.’’[34] There is no reason to assume that a high-ranking individual in one group would also become high ranking if moved to another. Nor is there any good evidence that ‘‘dominance’’ is a lifelong character trait. Competitive behavior was characterized by confident (e.g. growl, inhibited bite, stand over, mount, stare at, chase, bark at) and submissive (e.g. crouch, avoid, displacement lick/yawn, run away) patterns exchanged.[35]

One test to ascertain which in a group was the dominant dog used the following criteria: When a stranger comes to the house, which dog starts to bark first or if they start to bark together, which dog barks more or longer? Which dog licks more often the other dog’s mouth? If the dogs get food at the same time and at the same spot, which dog starts to eat first or eats the other dog’s food? If the dogs start to fight, which dog wins usually?[36]

Domestic dogs appear to pay little attention to relative size, despite the large weight differences between the largest and smallest individuals; for example, size was not a predictor of the outcome of encounters between dogs meeting while being exercised by their owners nor was size correlated with neutered male dogs.[37] Therefore, many dogs do not appear to pay much attention to the actual fighting ability of their opponent, presumably allowing differences in motivation (how much the dog values the resource) and perceived motivation (what the behavior of the other dog signifies about the likelihood that it will escalate) to play a much greater role.[35]

Two dogs that are contesting possession of a highly valued resource for the first time, if one is in a state of emotional arousal, or if one is in pain, or if reactivity is influenced by recent endocrine changes or motivational states such as hunger, then the outcome of the interaction may be different than if none of these factors were present. Equally, the threshold at which aggression is shown may be influenced by a range of medical factors, or, in some cases, precipitated entirely by pathological disorders. Hence, the contextual and physiological factors present when 2 dogs first encounter each other may profoundly influence the long-term nature of the relationship between those dogs. The complexity of the factors involved in this type of learning means that dogs may develop different ‘‘expectations’’ about the likely response of another individual for each resource in a range of different situations. Puppies learn early not to challenge an older dog and this respect stays with them into adulthood. When adult animals meet for the first time, they have no expectations of the behavior of the other: they will both, therefore, be initially anxious and vigilant in this encounter (characterized by the tense body posture and sudden movements typically seen when 2 dogs first meet), until they start to be able to predict the responses of the other individual. The outcome of these early adult–adult interactions will be influenced by the specific factors present at the time of the initial encounters. As well as contextual and physiological factors, the previous experiences of each member of the dyad of other dogs will also influence their behavior.[35]

Feral dogs

In 2004, a study reviewed 5 other studies of feral dogs published between 1975 and 1995 and concluded that their pack structure is very loose and rarely involves any cooperative behavior, either in raising young or in obtaining food.[38] Feral dogs are primarily scavengers, with studies showing that unlike their wild cousins, they are poor ungulate hunters, having little impact on wildlife populations where they are sympatric. However, feral dogs have been reported to be effective hunters of reptiles in the Galápagos Islands.[39]: 267 

Reproduction behavior

Further information: Canine reproduction § The reproductive cycle, and Canine reproduction § Copulation

Behavior problems

A survey of 203 dog owners in Melboourne, Australia, found that the main behaviour problems reported by owners were overexcitement (63%) and jumping up on people (56%).[40]

Separation anxiety

When dogs are separated from humans, usually the owner, they often display behaviours such as destructiveness, faecal or urinary elimination, hypersalivation or vocalisation. Dogs from single-owner homes are approximately 2.5 times more likely to have separation anxiety compared to dogs from multiple-owner homes. Futhermore, sexually intact dogs are only one third as likely to have separation anxiety as neutered dogs. The sex of dogs and whether their is another pet in the home do not have an affect on separation anxiety.[41]

Tail chasing

Tail chasing can be classified as a stereotypy. In one clinical study on the behaval problem, 18 tail-chasing terriers were given clomipramine orally at a dosage of 1 to 2 mg/kg (0.5 to 0.9 mg/lb) of body weight, every 12 hours. Three of the dogs required treatment at a slightly higher dosage range to control tail chasing, however, after 1 to 12 weeks of treatment, 9 of 12 dogs were reported to have a 75% or greater reduction in tail chasing.[42]

Comparison of behavior with other canids

After undergoing training to solve a simple manipulation task, dogs that are faced with an insoluble version of the same problem look at the human, while socialized wolves do not.[43]

In 1982, a study to observe the differences between dogs and wolves raised in similar conditions took place. The dog puppies preferred larger amounts of sleep at the beginning of their lives, while the wolf puppies were much more active. The dog puppies also preferred the company of humans, rather than their canine foster mother, though the wolf puppies were the exact opposite, spending more time with their foster mother. The dogs also showed a greater interest in the food given to them and paid little attention to their surroundings, while the wolf puppies found their surroundings to be much more intriguing than their food or food bowl. The wolf puppies were observed taking part in agonistic play at a younger age, while the dog puppies did not display dominant/submissive roles until they were much older. The wolf puppies were rarely seen as being aggressive to each other or towards the other canines. On the other hand, the dog puppies were much more aggressive to each other and other canines, often seen full-on attacking their foster mother or one another.[44]

Dogs in human society

Further information: Human-canine bond

Research has shown that there are individual differences in the interactions between dogs and their human masters that have significant effects on dog behavior. In 1997, a study showed that the type of relationship between dog and master, characterized as either companionship or working relationship, significantly affected the dog's performance on a cognitive problem-solving task. They speculate that companion dogs have a more dependent relationship with their owners, and look to them to solve problems. In contrast, working dogs are more independent.[45]

Dogs in the family

Further information: Companion dog

Dogs at work

Service dogs are those that are trained to help people with disabilities. Detection dogs are trained to using their sense of smell to detect substances such as explosives, illegal drugs, wildlife scat, or blood. In science, dogs have helped humans understand about the conditioned reflex.

Attacks

Main article: Dog attack
A dog's teeth can inflict serious injuries

In the UK between 2005 and 2013, there were 17 fatal dog attacks. In 2007-08 there were 4,611 hospital admissions due to dog attacks, which increased to 5,221 in 2008-09. It has been estimated that more than 200,000 people a year are bitten by dogs in England, with the annual cost to the National Health Service of treating injuries about £3 million.[46] A report published in 2014 stated there were 6,743 hospital admissions specifically caused by dog bites, a 5.8% increase from the 6,372 admissions in the previous 12 months.[47]

In the US between 1979 and 1996, there were more than 300 human dog bite-related fatalities.[48] In the US in 2013, there were 31 dog-bite related deaths. Each year, more than 4.5 million people in the US are bitten by dogs and almost 1 in 5 require medical attention.[49]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Freedman, Adam H.; Gronau, Ilan; Schweizer, Rena M.; Ortega-Del Vecchyo, Diego; Han, Eunjung; Silva, Pedro M.; Galaverni, Marco; Fan, Zhenxin; Marx, Peter; Lorente-Galdos, Belen; Beale, Holly; Ramirez, Oscar; Hormozdiari, Farhad; Alkan, Can; Vilà, Carles; Squire, Kevin; Geffen, Eli; Kusak, Josip; Boyko, Adam R.; Parker, Heidi G.; Lee, Clarence; Tadigotla, Vasisht; Siepel, Adam; Bustamante, Carlos D.; Harkins, Timothy T.; Nelson, Stanley F.; Ostrander, Elaine A.; Marques-Bonet, Tomas; Wayne, Robert K.; Novembre, John (16 January 2014). "Genome Sequencing Highlights Genes Under Selection and the Dynamic Early History of Dogs". PLOS Genetics. 10 (1). PLOS Org: e1004016. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1004016. PMC 3894170. PMID 24453982. Retrieved December 8, 2014.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  2. ^ Thalmann, O.; Shapiro, B.; Cui, P.; Schuenemann, V.J.; Sawyer, S.K.; Greenfield, D.L.; Germonpré, M.B.; Sablin, M.V.; López-Giráldez, F.; Domingo-Roura, X.; Napierala, H.; Uerpmann, H-P.; Loponte, D.M.; Acosta, A.A.; Giemsch, L.; Schmitz, R.W.; Worthington, B.; Buikstra, J.E.; Druzhkova, A.S.; Graphodatsky, A.S.; Ovodov, N.D.; Wahlberg, N.; Freedman, A.H.; Schweizer, R.M.; Koepfli, K.-P.; Leonard, J.A.; Meyer, M.; Krause, J.; Pääbo, S.; Green, R.E.; Wayne, Robert K. (15 November 2013). "Complete Mitochondrial Genomes of Ancient Canids Suggest a European Origin of Domestic Dogs". Science. 342 (6160). AAAS: 871–874. doi:10.1126/science.1243650. Retrieved 24 December 2014.
  3. ^ Wolpert, Stuart (November 14, 2013), "Dogs likely originated in Europe more than 18,000 years ago, UCLA biologists report", UCLA News Room, retrieved December 10, 2014
  4. ^ Wang, Xiaoming. Dogs: Their Fossil Relatives and Evolutionary History. Columbia University Press. pp. 233–236.
  5. ^ Miklósi, Ãdám. Dog Behaviour, Evolution, and Cognition. Oxford. p. 167.
  6. ^ Cossins, Dan (May 16, 2013), "Dogs and Human Evolving Together", The Scientist, retrieved January 12, 2014
  7. ^ Viegas, Jennifer (January 16, 2014), "Dogs Not as Close Kin to Wolves as Thought", Discovery News, retrieved December 10, 2014
  8. ^ a b Coren, Stanley (2004). How Dogs Think. First Free Press, Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-7432-2232-6.[page needed]
  9. ^ Udell, M.A.R., Dorey, N.R. and Wynne, C.D.L. (2010). "What did domestication do to dogs? A new account of dogs' sensitivity to human actions". Biological Reviews. 85 (2): 327–345. doi:10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00104.x.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. ^ Shipman P (2011) The Animal Connection. A New Perspective on What Makes Us Human. New York: W.W. Norton and Co
  11. ^ Bradshaw J (2011) Dog Sense. How the New Science of Dog Behavior Can Make You a Better Friend. New York: Basic Books
  12. ^ Hare B, Brown M, Williamson C, Tomasello M (2002) The domestication of social cognition in dogs. Science 398: 1634–1636
  13. ^ Hare B, Tomasello M (2005) Human-like social skills in dogs? Trends Cogn Sci 9: 439–444
  14. ^ Teglas E, Gergely A, Kupan K, Miklosi A, Topal J (2012) Dogs' gaze following is tuned to human communicative signals. Current Biology 22: 209–212
  15. ^ Kaminski J, Call J, Fischer J (2004) Word learning in a domestic dog: evidence for “fast mapping”. Science 304: 1682–1683
  16. ^ Mendl, M., Brooks, J., Basse, C., Burman, O., Paul, E., Blackwell, E. and Casey, R. (2010). "Dogs showing separation-related behaviour exhibit a 'pessimistic' cognitive bias" (PDF). Current Biology. 20 (19).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  17. ^ Bekoff M (2007) The Emotional Lives of Animals. Novato: New World Publishers
  18. ^ Péter Pongrácz, Petra Bánhegyi and Ádám Miklósi (2012) When rank counts—dominant dogs learn better from a human demonstrator in a two-action test — Behaviour 149 (2012) 111–132
  19. ^ a b c d Coren, Stanley (2004). How Dogs Think. First Free Press, Simon & Schuster. ISBN 0-7432-2232-6.[page needed]
  20. ^ A&E Television Networks (1998). Big Dogs, Little Dogs: The companion volume to the A&E special presentation. A Lookout Book. GT Publishing. ISBN 1-57719-353-9.[page needed]
  21. ^ a b Alderton, David (1984). The Dog. Chartwell Books. ISBN 0-89009-786-0.[page needed]
  22. ^ a b c Jennifer Davis (1998). "Dr. P's Dog Training: Vision in Dogs & People". Retrieved February 20, 2015.
  23. ^ a b Elert, Glenn; Timothy Condon (2003). "Frequency Range of Dog Hearing". The Physics Factbook. Retrieved 22 October 2008.
  24. ^ "How well do dogs and other animals hear". Retrieved 7 January 2008.
  25. ^ a b "Dog Sense of Hearing". seefido.com. Retrieved 22 October 2008.
  26. ^ Horowitz, A. (2009). "Attention to attention in domestic dog Canis familiaris dyadic play". Animal Cognition. 12: 107–118.
  27. ^ Ward, C., Bauer, E.B. and Smuts, B.B. (2008). "Partner preferences and asymmetries in social play among domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris, littermates". Animal Behaviour. 76 (4): 1187–1199. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.06.004.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  28. ^ Rooney, N.J., Bradshaw, J.W.S. and Robinson, I.H. (2000). "A comparison of dog–dog and dog–human play behaviour". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 66 (3): 235–248.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  29. ^ Rooney, N.J. and Bradshaw, Jv.W.S. (2003). "Links between play and dominance and attachment dimensions of dog-human relationships". Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science. 6 (2): 67–94. doi:10.1207/S15327604JAWS0602_01.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  30. ^ Horváth, Z., Dóka, A. and Miklósi A. (2008). "Affiliative and disciplinary behavior of human handlers during play with their dog affects cortisol concentrations in opposite directions". Hormones and Behavior. 54 (1): 107–114.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  31. ^ Custance, D; Mayer, J (2012). "Empathic-like responding by domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) to distress in humans: an exploratory study". Anim Cogn.: 851–9. doi:10.1007/s10071-012-0510-1.
  32. ^ Svartberga, K. and Forkman, B. (2002). "Personality traits in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris)". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 79 (2): 133–155. doi:10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00121-1.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  33. ^ Svartberg, K; Tapper, I; Temrin, H; Radesater, T; Thorman, S (February 2005). "Consistency of personality traits in dogs". Animal Behaviour. 69 (2): 283–291. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.04.011.
  34. ^ Drews, C., 1993. The concept and definition of dominance in animal behaviour. Behaviour. 125, 283-313
  35. ^ a b c John W. S. Bradshaw, Emily J. Blackwell, Rachel A. Casey (2009) Dominance in domestic dogs - useful construct or bad habit? Journal of Veterinary Behavior (2009) 4, 135-144 [1]
  36. ^ Pongrácz, P., Vida, V., Bánhegyi, P. & Miklósi, Á. (2008). How does dominance rank status affect individual and social learning performance in the dog (Canis familiaris)?—Anim. Cogn. 11: 75-82.
  37. ^ Bradshaw, J.W.S., Lea, A.M., 1993. Dyadic interactions between domestic dogs during exercise. Anthrozoo¨s. 5, 245-253
  38. ^ van Kerkhove, W., 2004. A fresh look at the wolf-pack theory of companion-animal dog social behavior. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 7, 279-285
  39. ^ Serpell, James (1995). "Origins of the dog: domestication and early history". The Domestic Dog. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. ISBN 0-521-41529-2.
  40. ^ Kobelt, A.J., Hemsworth, P.H., Barnett, J.L. and Coleman, G.J. (2003). "A survey of dog ownership in suburban Australia—conditions and behaviour problems". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 82 (2): 137–148. doi:10.1016/S0168-1591(03)00062-5.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  41. ^ Flannigan, G. and Dodman, N.H.A (2001). "Risk factors and behaviors associated with separation anxiety in dogs". Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 219 (4): 460–466. doi:10.2460/javma.2001.219.460.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  42. ^ Moon-Fanelli, A.A. and Dodman, N.H. (1998). "Description and development of compulsive tail chasing in terriers and response to clomipramine treatment". Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 212 (8): 1252–1257. PMID 9569164.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  43. ^ Miklósi, Adam; Kubinyi E; Topál J; Gácsi M; Virányi Z; Csányi V. (29 April 2003). "A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans, but dogs do". Current Biology;13(9). 13 (9): 763–6. PMID 12725735.
  44. ^ Frank H; Frank MG (1982). "On the effects of domestication on canine social development and behavior". Applied Animal Ethology. 8 (6): 507–525. doi:10.1016/0304-3762(82)90215-2.
  45. ^ Topál, J., Miklósi, Á. and Csányi, V. (1997). "Dog-human relationship affects problem solving behavior in the dog". Anthrozoös. 10: 214–224.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  46. ^ Prynne, M. "Dog attack laws and statistics". The Telegraph. Retrieved April 14, 2015.
  47. ^ "Dog bite hospitalisations highest in deprived areas". NHS Choices. 2014. Retrieved April 14, 2015.
  48. ^ Sacks, J.J. (2000). "Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks" (PDF). JAVMA. 217 (6): 836–840. Retrieved April 14, 2015.
  49. ^ "Infographic: Dog bites by the numbers". AVMA. 2014. Retrieved April 14, 2015.

Cite error: A list-defined reference named "lord2012" is not used in the content (see the help page).
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "coppinger2001" is not used in the content (see the help page).

Cite error: A list-defined reference named "ortolani2009" is not used in the content (see the help page).

External links

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=657322487

Leave a Reply