Dog-eat-Dog

Madhur Mangalam
…for a species…
minimally
required
area

food
distribution

food
density

predation
pressure

ecological
factors

Schaik & Hooff, 1983

minimally
required
area

food feeding
distribution strategy

food
density

predation anti-
pressure predation
strategy

ecological behavioral
factors responses

Schaik & Hooff, 1983

minimally
required
area

food feeding group

distribution strategy cohesion

food
density
group
size
predation anti-
pressure predation
strategy

group
ecological behavioral characte-
factors responses ristics

social
structure

Schaik & Hooff, 1983

minimally
required
area

food feeding group group

distribution strategy cohesion composition

food
density
group
size
predation anti- patterns in
predation migration genetic
pressure patterns
strategy relatedness

group
ecological behavioral characte- social organization
factors responses ristics

social
structure

Schaik & Hooff, 1983

minimally
required
area

food feeding group group

distribution strategy cohesion composition

patterns
food in social
density behavior
group
size
predation anti- patterns in
predation migration genetic
pressure patterns
strategy relatedness

group
ecological behavioral characte- social organization
factors responses ristics

social social
structure organization

Schaik & Hooff, 1983

minimally
required
area

food feeding group group

distribution strategy cohesion composition

patterns
food in social
density behavior
group
size
predation anti- patterns in
predation migration genetic
pressure patterns
strategy relatedness

group
ecological behavioral characte- social organization
factors responses ristics

social social
structure organization

Schaik & Hooff, 1983

…for dogs…
 …for dogs…
food distribution behavioral
and density responses

?
 …for dogs…
food distribution behavioral
and density responses

?
distribution visibility predictability

clustered high high

scattered low low

 …for dogs…
food distribution
and density aggression

distribution visibility predictability

clustered high high

scattered low low

 …for dogs…
food distribution
and density aggression

distribution visibility predictability

clustered high high

pet dogs (P)
scattered low low
stray dogs (S)
 …for dogs…
food distribution
and density aggression

distribution visibility predictability

clustered high high

pet dogs (P)
scattered low low
stray dogs (S)

stray* dogs (S*) stray dogs (S)

 …for dogs…
dominance
hierarchy
aggression

pet dogs (P) linear high

stray dogs (S) egalitarian low

 …for dogs…
time to open
…predicts… food pack (T)

pet dogs (P) less

stray dogs (S) more

 …by…

- 15 pet dogs

- 34 stray dogs
-24 stray dogs
-10 stray* dogs

…49 dogs
…by dogs…
 …by dogs…
time to open
food pack (T)

pet dogs (P) more

null hypothesis
rejected, α<0.05 stray dogs (S) less
 …by dogs…
time to open
food pack (T)

stray* dogs (S*) x

null hypothesis
failed to reject, stray dogs (S) x
α>0.05
 …by dogs…
time to open
food pack (T)

females more
null hypothesis
rejected, α<0.05 males less
…of dogs…
…of dogs…

aggression

pet dogs (P) high

stray dogs (S) low

…of dogs…

aggression

pet dogs (P) high

stray dogs (S) low

 …of dogs…

aggression

pet dogs (P) high

stray dogs (S) low

…absence of ‘foraging optimization’ in pet dogs…

…of dogs…

aggression

stray dogs* (S*) x

stray dogs (S) x

 …of dogs…

aggression

stray dogs* (S*) x

stray dogs (S) x

…problem with the identification or not

much difference in resource contexts…
 …of dogs…
time to open
food pack (T)

?
females more

males less

…sexual dimorphism…
Thanks