Determining the age of adult wild dogs (Canis lupus dingo, C-l. domesticus and their hybrids). I. Pulp cavity: tooth width ratios

In order to determine the age of adult wild dogs, we compared two methods ( that of Thomson and Rose (TR method) and that of Knowlton and Whittemore (KW method)) of measuring and calculating pulp cavity : tooth width ratios on upper and lower canine teeth from 68 mixed-sex, known-age wild dogs of 9 months to 13 years of age reared at two localities. Although significant relationships ( P = 0.0001) were found between age and pulp cavity ratios by both methods, the TR ratio calculation and measurement showed heteroscedasity in error variance whereas the KW ratios had a more stable error variance and were normally distributed. The KW method also found significant differences between pulp cavity ratios between teeth of the upper and lower jaws ( P < 0.0001) and sex ( P = 0.01) but not geographic origin ( P = 0.1). Regressions and formulae for fitted curves are presented separately for male and female wild dogs. Males show greater variability in pulp cavity decrements with age than do females, suggesting a physiological difference between the sexes. We conclude that the KW method of using pulp cavity as a proportion of tooth width, measured 15 mm from the root tip and averaged over both upper canines, is the more accurate method of estimating the age of adult wild dogs.

Assessing the taxonomic status of dingoes Canis familiaris dingo for conservation

1. The conservation status of the dingo Canis familiaris dingo is threatened by hybridization with the domestic dog C. familiaris familiaris. A practical method that can estimate the different levels of hybridization in the field is urgently required so that animals below a specific threshold of dingo ancestry (e.g. 1/4 or 1/2 dingoes) can reliably be identified and removed from dingo populations. 2. Skull morphology has been traditionally used to assess dingo purity, but this method does not discriminate between the different levels of dingo ancestry in hybrids. Furthermore, measurements can only be reliably taken from the skulls of dead animals. 3. Methods based on the analysis of variation in DNA are able to discriminate between the different levels of hybridization, but the validity of this method has been questioned because the materials currently used as a reference for dingoes are from captive animals of unproven genetic purity. The use of pre-European materials would improve the accuracy of this method, but suitable material has not been found in sufficient quantity to develop a reliable reference population. Furthermore, current methods based on DNA are impractical for the field-based discrimination of hybrids because samples require laboratory analysis. 4. Coat colour has also been used to estimate the extent of hybridization and is possibly the most practical method to apply in the field. However, this method may not be as powerful as genetic or morphological analyses because some hybrids (e.g. Australian cattle dog x dingo) are similar to dingoes in coat colour and body form. This problem may be alleviated by using additional visual characteristics such as the presence/absence of ticking and white markings.

Do dogs (canis familiaris) understand invisible displacement?

Domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) perform above chance on invisible displacement tasks despite showing few other signs of possessing the necessary representational abilities. Four experiments investigated how dogs find an object that has been hidden in 1 of 3 opaque boxes. Dogs passed the task under a variety of control conditions, but only if the device used to displace the object ended up adjacent to the target box after the displacement. These results suggest that the search behavior of dogs was guided by simple associative rules rather than mental representation of the object's past trajectory. In contrast, Experiment 5 found that on the same task, 18- and 24-month-old children showed no disparity between trials in which the displacement device was adjacent or nonadjacent to the target box.

Do chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) understand single invisible displacement?

Previous research suggests that chimpanzees understand single invisible displacement. However, this Piagetian task may be solvable through the use of simple search strategies rather than through mentally representing the past trajectory of an object. Four control conditions were thus administered to two chimpanzees in order to separate associative search strategies from performance based on mental representation. Strategies involving experimenter cue-use, search at the last or first box visited by the displacement device, and search at boxes adjacent to the displacement device were systematically controlled for. Chimpanzees showed no indications of utilizing these simple strategies, suggesting that their capacity to mentally represent single invisible displacements is comparable to that of 18-24-month-old children.

Do chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and 2-year-old children (Homo sapiens) understand double invisible displacement?

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and young children (Homo sapiens) have difficulty with double invisible displacements in which an object is hidden in two nonadjacent boxes in a linear array. Experiment 1 eliminated the possibility that chimpanzees' previous poor performance was due to the hiding direction of the displacement device. As in Call (2001), subjects failed double nonadjacent displacements, showing a tendency to select adjacent boxes. In Experiments 2 and 3, chimpanzees and 24-month-old children were tested on a new adaptation of the task in which four hiding boxes were presented in a diamond-shaped array on a vertical plane. Both species performed above chance on double invisible displacements using this format, suggesting that previous poor performance was due to a response bias or inhibition problem rather than a fundamental limitation in representational capacity.