liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Understanding of human referential gestures is not correlated to human-directed social behaviour in Labrador retrievers and German shepherd dogs
Linköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. (AVIAN Behaviour Genomics and Physiology Group)
Linköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. (AVIAN Behaviour Genomics and Physiology Group)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6115-7517
Linköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. (AVIAN Behaviour Genomics and Physiology Group)
Linköping University, Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biology, Biology. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. (AVIAN Behaviour Genomics and Physiology Group)
Show others and affiliations
2018 (English)In: Applied Animal Behaviour Science, ISSN 0168-1591, E-ISSN 1872-9045, Vol. 201, p. 46-53Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Dogs are known to excel in interspecific communication with humans and both communicate with humans and follow human communicative cues. Two tests commonly used to test these skills are, firstly, the problem-solving paradigm, and, secondly, following human referential signals, for example pointing. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether dogs that seek more human contact in an unsolvable problem-solving paradigm also better understand human communicative cues in a pointing test. We also assessed between- and within-breed variation in both tests. 167 dogs were tested and were of the breeds German shepherd dog and Labrador retriever. The Labradors were separated into the two selection lines: common type (bred for show and pet) and field type (bred for hunting). A principal component analysis of behaviours during the problem solving revealed four components: Passivity, Experimenter Contact, Owner Contact and Eye Contact. We analysed the effect of these components on success rate in the pointing test and we found no effect for three of them, while a negative correlation was found for Owner Contact (F(1,147) = 6.892; P = 0.010). This was only present in common-typed Labradors. We conclude that the ability to follow a pointing cue does not predict the propensity for human-directed social behaviour in a problem-solving situation and suggest that the two tests measure different aspects of human-directed social behaviour in dogs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2018. Vol. 201, p. 46-53
Keywords [en]
Human-dog communication, Human-directed social behaviour, Pointing test, Problem-solving test, German shepherd dogs. Labrador retrievers
National Category
Biological Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-145542DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2017.12.017ISI: 000430774800007Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85039704233OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-145542DiVA, id: diva2:1187772
Note

Funding agencies: European Research Council (ERC) [322206]

Available from: 2018-03-05 Created: 2018-03-05 Last updated: 2019-04-17Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Dog behaviour: Intricate picture of genetics, epigenetics, and human-dog relations
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Dog behaviour: Intricate picture of genetics, epigenetics, and human-dog relations
2019 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Dogs, Canis familiaris, share the lives of humans all over the world. That dogs, and the behavior of dogs, are of interest to many is therefore no surprise. In this thesis, the main aim has been to identify factors that affect dogs’ behaviours.

The dog, Canis familiaris, is our first domesticated animal. Since domestication, various types of dogs have developed through adaptation to an environment shared with humans and through our selective breeding, resulting in a unique variation in morphology and behaviour. Although there is an individual variation in the behaviour of dogs, there is also a difference between breeds. Moreover, selection during the last decades has split some breeds into divergent types. Labrador and golden retrievers are divided into a common type, for show and companionship, and a field type, for hunting. By comparing the breed types, we can study the effects of recent selection. In Paper I, we investigate differences in general behavioural traits between Labrador and golden retriever and between common and field type within the two breeds by using results from the standardized behaviour test Dog Mentality Assessment. There were differences between breeds and types for all behavioural traits. However, there was also an interaction between breed and type. Thus, a common/field-type Labrador does not behave like a common/field-type golden retriever. Even though they have been selected for similar traits, the selection has affected the general behavioural traits differently in the two breeds.

In paper II, we were interested in dogs’ human-directed social skills. Dogs have a high social competence when it comes to humans. Two experiments commonly used to study these skills are the problem-solving test, where dogs’ human-directed behaviours when faced with a problem are measured, and the pointing test, where dogs are tested on how well they understand human gestures. We compared the social skills of German shepherds and Labrador retrievers, and of common- and field-type Labradors. Labradors were more successful in the pointing test and German shepherds stayed closer to their owners during the problem solving. Among Labrador types, the field type had more human eye contact than the common type. Importantly, when comparing the two experiments, we found no positive correlations between the problem-solving test and the pointing test, suggesting that the two tests measure different aspects of human-directed social behaviour in dogs.

A previous study has identified two suggestive genetic regions for human-directed social behaviours during the problem-solving test in beagles. In paper III, we show that these SNPs are also associated to social behaviours in Labrador and golden retrievers. Moreover, the Labrador breed types differed significantly in allele frequencies. This indicates that the two SNPs have been affected by recent selection and may have a part in the differences in sociability between common and field type.

The behaviour of dogs cannot simply be explained by genetics, there is also an environmental component. In paper IV, we study which factors that affect long-term stress in dogs. Long-term cortisol can be measured by hair samples. We found a clear synchronization in hair cortisol concentrations between dogs and their owners. Neither dogs’ activity levels nor their behavioural traits affected the cortisol, however, the personality of the owners did. Therefore, we suggest that dogs mirror the stress level of their owners.

The mediator between genes and the environment is epigenetics, and one epigenetic factor is DNA methylation. In paper V, we compared methylation patterns of wolves and dogs as well as dog breeds. Between both wolves and dogs and among dogs there were substantial differences in methylated DNA regions, suggesting that DNA methylation is likely to contribute to the vast variation among canines. We hypothesize that epigenetic factors have been important during domestication and in breed formation.

In this thesis, I cover several aspects on how dogs’ behaviours can be affected, and paint an intricate picture on how genetics, epigenetics, and human-dog relations forms dog behaviour.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2019. p. 49
Series
Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations, ISSN 0345-7524 ; 1989
National Category
Evolutionary Biology Zoology Behavioral Sciences Biology Genetics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-156353 (URN)10.3384/diss.diva-156353 (DOI)9789176850725 (ISBN)
Public defence
2019-05-09, Planck, Fysikhuset, Campus Valla, Linköping, 09:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2019-04-17 Created: 2019-04-17 Last updated: 2019-04-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(557 kB)32 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 557 kBChecksum SHA-512
9ccc2e7f1cc49cb871f14597c32444fa33a6b03128c33b1f58f1b8acaa27daf7335c9f4535999139b1c25eeb2a565a8057092f8a6f7e994e0337594f9bce71ed
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Persson, Mia

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Sundman, Ann-SofiePersson, MiaGrozelier, AnnaHalldén, Lise-LotteJensen, PerRoth, Lina
By organisation
BiologyFaculty of Science & Engineering
In the same journal
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Biological Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 32 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 203 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf