Dataset Information

Food preferences of similarly raised and kept captive dogs and wolves.

ABSTRACT: Food preferences may be driven by a species' ecology. Closely related species such as dogs and wolves may have evolved preferences for different foods owing to their differing foraging styles. Wolves have been shown to be more persistent in problem-solving experiments and more risk-prone in a foraging task. A possible element affecting these (and other) results is a potential wolf-dog difference in food preferences. To address this possibility, we tested similarly raised and kept dogs and wolves in two different food choice tasks, a classic two-choice task and a multiple-choice paradigm. We predicted that if dogs have adapted to a more opportunistic, scavenging foraging style, they would show a weaker preference for meat over starch rich foods (such as kibble) and be less affected by hunger than wolves. Alternatively, given the recentness of the new niche dogs have created, we predicted no substantial differences between dogs' and wolves' food preferences. We found that our subjects did not differ in their preference for meat over kibble in either paradigm. However, wolves' (but not dogs') choice patterns were affected by satiation, with wolves being less "selective" when hungry. Furthermore, when fed before testing, wolves were more selective than dogs. These differences were more noticeable in the multiple-choice paradigm than the two-choice task, suggesting that the former, novel paradigm may be more sensitive and better capable of evaluating food preferences in a diverse range of species. Overall, we found that the distinct differences in wolves' and dogs' ecology and foraging styles do not appear to have affected their food preferences and thus, differences in food preferences are unlikely to have influenced results of previous experiments demonstrating wolf-dog differences in cognitive skills.

SUBMITTER: Rao A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6157812 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Food preferences of similarly raised and kept captive dogs and wolves.

Rao Akshay A Range Friederike F Kadletz Kerstin K Kotrschal Kurt K Marshall-Pescini Sarah S

PloS one 20180920 9

Food preferences may be driven by a species' ecology. Closely related species such as dogs and wolves may have evolved preferences for different foods owing to their differing foraging styles. Wolves have been shown to be more persistent in problem-solving experiments and more risk-prone in a foraging task. A possible element affecting these (and other) results is a potential wolf-dog difference in food preferences. To address this possibility, we tested similarly raised and kept dogs and wolves ...[more]

PMID: 30235228

Similar Datasets

Project description:Adaptation during the domestication from wolves (Canis lupus) to dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) is a debated ecological topic. Changes in food and environment are major divergences in the domestication of dogs. Gut microbes play an important role in animal adaptation to the food and environmental changes. In this study, shotgun sequencing was performed to compare the species diversity and functional diversity of gut microbes in wild wolves (group CLW, n = 3), captive wolves (group CLC, n = 4), and domestic dogs (group CLF, n = 4). The results found that Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, Fusobacteria, Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria were the most abundant phyla and Bacteroides, Fusobacterium, Prevotella, Megamonas, Paraprevotella, Faecalibacterium, Clostridium were the most abundant genera in the gut of wolves and dogs. Groups CLW, CLC and CLF have shown significant difference in gut microbial species diversity and functional diversity. Bacteroides, Fusobacterium and Faecalibacterium were most abundant genera in groups CLW, CLC and CLF, respectively. Their abundance varied significantly among groups. Compared to the wild wolves, the intestinal microbiol genes of domestic dogs were significantly enriched in the carbohydrate metabolism pathway of KEGG database. One hundred and seventy-seven enzymes were detected with significantly higher abundance in group CLF than that in group CLW, and 49 enzymes showed extremely significant higher abundance in group CLF than that in group CLW (q < 0.01) base on the function abundance annotated in CAZy database. It is noteworthy that there were also significant differences in the abundance of 140 enzymes between groups CLC and CLW (q < 0.05). Clustering analysis based on both the species and the function abundance of intestinal microbiota all found that groups CLC and CLF clustered into one branch, while samples from group CLW clustered into the other branch. This result suggests that captive wolves are more similar to domestic dogs than wild wolves in both species composition and function composition of intestinal microbiota.

Project description:AbstractFood 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 statementDespite 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.

Dataset Information

Food preferences of similarly raised and kept captive dogs and wolves.

Publications

Food preferences of similarly raised and kept captive dogs and wolves.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets