8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The paradox of canine conspecific coprophagy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Canine conspecific coprophagy, the tendency or predisposition of some dogs to eat their own faeces or those of other dogs, seems paradoxical because dogs typically show an aversion to conspecific faeces. In an attempt to resolve this paradox, we set out to determine the factors associated with the occurrence of this behaviour and to evaluate the efficacy of 11 products marketed for treating coprophagy as well as behaviour modification procedures. Because a large sample of dogs was needed to address these issues, two web‐based surveys were utilized. One, intended to compare coprophagic dogs and non‐coprophagic dogs, yielded 1552 returns. The other, yielding 1475 usable returns, specifically recruited owners of coprophagic dogs to gather information about the characteristics of coprophagy and treatment success. The findings revealed that 16% of dogs sampled engaged in frequent conspecific coprophagy, defined as having been seen eating stools at least six times. No evidence was found relating the coprophagy to diet or the dog's age. Coprophagic dogs were as easily house trained as non‐coprophagic dogs, suggesting a normal aversion to faeces. Coprophagic dogs were more likely to be reported as greedy eaters than non‐coprophagic dogs. The reported success rate of the commercial products and behaviour modification approaches was close to zero, indicating that the behaviour is not readily changed. The coprophagy was overwhelmingly directed at fresh stools, defined as being no more than 2 days old. A hypothesis is offered that coprophagy reflects a tendency inherited from the ancestral wolf to keep the den area free of faecal‐borne intestinal parasites that might be deposited in the den resting area and would typically have parasite ova that are not initially infective, but could develop infective larvae after 2 days. An evolved parasite defence strategy to consume fresh faeces in the rest area would be adaptive.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Behavioral adaptations to pathogens and parasites: Five strategies

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Behavioral adaptations to pathogens and parasites: five strategies.

            The ever present threat of viral, bacterial, protozoan and metazoan parasites in the environment of wild animals is viewed as responsible for the natural selection of a variety of behavioral patterns that enable animals to survive and reproduce in this type of environment. Several lines of research, some quite recent, point to five behavioral strategies that vertebrates utilize to increase their personal or inclusive fitness in the face of parasites (broadly defined to include pathogens). These are: 1) avoidance of parasites; 2) controlled exposure to parasites to potentiate the immune system; 3) behavior of sick animals including anorexia and depression to overcome systemic febrile infections; 4) helping sick animals; 5) sexual selection for mating partners with the genetic endowment for resistance to parasites. The point is made that to consider a behavioral pattern as having evolved to serve a parasite control function the parasite or causative agent should be shown to adversely impact the animal's fitness and the behavior in question must be shown to help animals, or their offspring or group mates, in combating their exposure, or reducing their vulnerability, to the parasite.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Behavioural defences in animals against pathogens and parasites: parallels with the pillars of medicine in humans.

              No other theme in animal biology seems to be more central than the concept of employing strategies to survive and successfully reproduce. In nature, controlling or avoiding pathogens and parasites is an essential fitness strategy because of the ever-present disease-causing organisms. The disease-control strategies discussed here are: physical avoidance and removal of pathogens and parasites; quarantine or peripheralization of conspecifics that could be carrying potential pathogens; herbal medicine, animal style, to prevent or treat an infection; potentiation of the immune system; and care of sick or injured group members. These strategies are seen as also encompassing the pillars of human medicine: (i) quarantine; (ii) immune-boosting vaccinations; (iii) use of medicinal products; and (iv) caring or nursing. In contrast to animals, in humans, the disease-control strategies have been consolidated into a consistent and extensive medical system. A hypothesis that explains some of this difference between animals and humans is that humans are sick more often than animals. This increase in sickness in humans leading to an extensive, cognitively driven medical system is attributed to an evolutionary dietary transition from mostly natural vegetation to a meat-based diet, with an increase in health-eroding free radicals and a dietary reduction of free-radical-scavenging antioxidants.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                blhart@ucdavis.edu
                Journal
                Vet Med Sci
                Vet Med Sci
                10.1002/(ISSN)2053-1095
                VMS3
                Veterinary Medicine and Science
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2053-1095
                12 January 2018
                May 2018
                : 4
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1002/vms3.2018.4.issue-2 )
                : 106-114
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Cell Biology School of Veterinary Medicine University of California‐Davis Davis California 95616 USA
                [ 2 ] Department of Population Health and Reproduction School of Veterinary Medicine University of California‐Davis Davis California 95616 USA
                [ 3 ] Department of Medicine and Epidemiology School of Veterinary Medicine University of California‐Davis Davis California 95616 USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ]Correspondence: Benjamin L. Hart, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California‐Davis, Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Cell Biology, 1 Shields Avenue, CA 95616, USA. E‐mail: blhart@ 123456ucdavis.edu
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2342-6058
                Article
                VMS392
                10.1002/vms3.92
                5980124
                29851313
                741c5e51-203f-4f3c-a7f3-3bb271fb87a6
                © 2018 The Authors. Veterinary Medicine and Science Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 5, Pages: 9, Words: 6225
                Funding
                Funded by: Center for Companion Animal Health University of California, Davis
                Award ID: # 2009‐54‐F/M
                Categories
                Original Article
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                vms392
                May 2018
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:version=5.4.0 mode:remove_FC converted:31.05.2018

                canine,coprophagy,dogs,faeces eating,stool eating
                canine, coprophagy, dogs, faeces eating, stool eating

                Comments

                Comment on this article