Scent-marking by coyotes,Canis latrans: the influence of social and ecological factors

doi:10.1006/anbe.1997.0561

Animal Behaviour

Volume 54, Issue 5, November 1997, Pages 1155-1166

https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1997.0561 Get rights and content

Abstract

We observed 49 coyotes,Canis latransfrom five resident packs for 2456 h and five transient coyotes for 51 h from January 1991 to June 1993 in the Lamar River Valley, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, U.S.A. During these observations we recorded 3042 urinations, 451 defecations, 446 ground scratches and 743 double-marks. The rate of scent-marking (via urination) was influenced by the social organization (resident versus transient) to which the coyote belonged, the social class (alpha, beta or pup) of the animal and the time of the year. Transient coyotes scent-marked at a lower rate than did members of a resident pack. Within the resident packs, alpha coyotes scent-marked at a higher rate than beta coyotes (adults and yearlings subordinant to alphas, but dominant over pups) and pups. Alpha coyotes increased their rate of marking during the breeding season; beta and pup coyotes performed scent-marks at a relatively constant rate throughout the year. There was no influence of social class or time of year on the rate of defecation. The rate of double-marking was highest among alpha coyotes with a peak during the breeding season. Alpha coyotes ground-scratched at a higher rate than did beta and pup coyotes. Alpha and beta coyotes scent-marked more than expected along the periphery of the territory compared to the interior; pups marked in the interior and edge in proportion to expected frequencies. Double-marking and ground-scratching were higher than expected along the periphery of the territory. The distribution of defecations was not different from expected along the edge versus the interior of the territory. Pack size did not influence the rate of scent-marking performed by individuals in the pack or by the alpha pair. We concluded that alpha coyotes were the primary members of the resident pack involved in scent-marking. The large coyote packs and the high rate of marking by the alpha pairs were parallel to the scent-marking behaviour displayed by wolves,C. lupusto a greater extent than previously reported. Scent-marks appear to provide internal information to the members of the resident pack (internal map of territory, breeding condition, reproductive synchrony) and enhance demarcation of territorial boundaries.

References (47)

C.S. Asa et al.
The use of urine, faeces, and anal-gland secretions in scent-marking by a captive wolf,Canis lupus
Anim. Behav.
(1985)
C.S. Asa et al.
The influence of social and endocrine factors on urine-marking by captive wolves (Canis lupus)
Horm. Behav.
(1990)
C. Barrette et al.
Scent-marking in free-ranging coyotes,Canis latrans
Anim. Behav.
(1980)
M. Bekoff et al.
Social ecology and behavior of coyotes
Adv. Study Behav.
(1986)
I. Dunbar
Olfactory preferences in dogs: the response of male and female beagles to conspecific odors
Behav. Biol.
(1977)
E.M. Gese et al.
Social and nutritional factors influencing the dispersal of resident coyotes
Anim. Behav.
(1996)
R.N. Levin
Song behaviour and reproductive strategies in a duetting wren,Thryothorus nigri-capillus
Anim. Behav.
(1996)
R.N. Levin
Song behaviour and reproductive strategies in a duetting wren,Thryothorus nigri-capillus
Anim. Behav.
(1996)
R.J. Rothman et al.
Scent-marking in lone wolves and newly formed pairs
Anim. Behav.
(1979)
M.C. Wells et al.
An observational study of scent-marking in coyotes,Canis latrans
Anim. Behav.
(1981)

C.S. Asa et al.

Deposition of anal-sac secretions by captive wolves (Canis lupus

J. Mammal.

(1985)

M. Bekoff

Ground scratching by male domestic dogs: a composite signal

J. Mammal.

(1979)

M. Bekoff et al.

Precopulatory and copulatory behavior in coyotes

J. Mammal.

(1976)

Bowen, W. D. 1978, Social organization of the coyote in relation to prey size, University of British...

W.D. Bowen et al.

Scent marking in coyotes

Can. J. Zool.

(1980)

R.E. Brown et al.

Social Odours in Mammals

(1986)

F.J. Camenzind

Behavioral ecology of coyotes on the National Elk Refuge, Jackson, Wyoming

Coyotes: Biology, Behavior and Management

(1978)

R.A. Dirks et al.

The climate of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks

Nat. Park Serv. Occ. Paper

(1982)

J.F. Eisenberg et al.

Olfactory communication in mammals

A. Rev. Ecol. Syst.

(1972)

R.F. Ewer

The Carnivores

(1973)

M.W. Fox

Evolution of social behavior in canids

E.M. Gese et al.

Home range and habitat use of coyotes in southeastern Colorado

J. Wildl. Mgmt

(1988)

E.M. Gese et al.

Foraging ecology of coyotes (Canis latrans

Can. J. Zool.

(1996)

Cited by (125)

Patterns of scent marking by African wild dogs, Lycaon pictus, at shared marking sites
2024, Animal Behaviour
Individual patterns of scent marking can aid our understanding of the function of animal latrines. African wild dogs are pack-living social carnivores that regularly visit latrines, called shared marking sites, used by multiple neighbouring packs. Here we analysed scent marking by individual African wild dogs video captured at continuously monitored marking sites. Scent marking differed by sex and dominance status depending on social context (interpack versus intrapack exchanges). Dominants marked more frequently than subdominants, and patterns, particularly the order of overmarking, differed between the sexes. Dominant females were more likely than dominant males to overmark when the previous scent mark had been left by an individual from a different pack. Dominant males were more likely to leave the final, or top mark, regardless of social context or origin. Results are consistent with a resource defence advertisement function for wild dog latrines. However, sex-specific scent marking suggests the resource defended may differ between dominant females, which are more attentive to interpack scent marks, and dominant males, which are focused on overmarking a mate. The pattern of dominant male scent marking indicates that unambiguous advertisement of a bonded reproductive pair may be a critical component of communicating with neighbours about pack residence and territoriality.
Can a traditional partner preference test quantify monogamous behavior in captive coyotes?
2023, Behavioural Processes
Social monogamy is a unique social system exhibited by only 3–5% of mammalian taxa; however, all wild canid species exhibit this social system. Despite the high prevalence of social monogamy among canids, little is known about how they form selective social attachment relationships among non-kin. Thus, we aimed to quantify monogamous behavior in a highly ubiquitous canid, the coyote (Canis latrans). We adapted the three-chambered partner preference test, which was originally developed for prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster), to assess social preference in mated pairs of captive coyotes at the USDA Predator Research Facility. We quantified monogamy-related behaviors, such as time spent in spatial proximity to a pair-mate versus a stranger. Our behavioral ethogram also included visual seeking, olfactory investigations, ears down, scent marking, and affiliative behavior. Test subjects showed significantly greater affiliative behavior toward their partner than toward a stranger. However, there was extremely high variability both within and between coyote pairs across behavioral measures. These data suggest the need for larger sample sizes when working with species with high individual variability, as well as the need for species- and facility-specific modifications to this testing paradigm and/or ethogram to better adapt it from its laboratory and rodent-based origins.
Interpack communication in African wild dogs at long-term shared marking sites
2022, Animal Behaviour
Citation Excerpt :
Visits to an SMS alone does not indicate communication; scent marking (transmitting information) and subsequent sniffing (receiving information) are required for communication to occur. In common with previous studies of scent marking in this (Jordan et al., 2014) and other species (e.g. European badgers, Meles meles, Stewart et al., 2002; coyotes, Gese & Ruff, 1997; red foxes, Vulpes vulpes, Henry, 1977) we distinguished between these behaviours in this study, and found that sniffing occurred at almost all visits to SMSs by all groups of African wild dogs, while marking occurred at only close to three-quarters of visits. Visits to SMSs were not restricted to resident (territory-holding) packs; dispersing coalitions of dogs also visited these marking sites.
Scent marks deposited as semiochemical signals are a primary mode of communication for a broad range of mammal species. Such scent signals are often deposited at specific, frequently visited marking sites called latrines. Despite descriptions of widespread latrine use by numerous mammal species, detailed understanding of site visit rates and latrine function is lacking. Here we report for the first time a quantitative assessment of scent-marking behaviours that represent interpack olfactory communication by African wild dogs, Lycaon pictus, at latrines visited by multiple resident neighbouring packs, hereafter called a ‘shared marking site’ (SMS). We show that multiple packs visited specific SMSs frequently and regularly throughout the year, with a notable decrease in visits during the 3-month denning season coinciding with a contraction in range size. In addition to resident neighbouring packs, dispersing individuals visited and scent-marked at SMSs, suggesting that latrines function at least in part as sites communicating information about residence and possibly reproductive status. Further detailed investigation of the relevance of latrine use to territorial behaviour, ranging, habitat use and dispersal in this species is required, particularly as it may have direct applied conservation implications for this wide-ranging but territorial endangered species.
What is a pair bond?
2021, Hormones and Behavior
Pair bonding is a psychological construct that we attempt to operationalize via behavioral and physiological measurements. Yet, pair bonding has been both defined differently in various taxonomic groups as well as used loosely to describe not just a psychological and affective phenomenon, but also a social structure or mating system (either social monogamy or just pair living). In this review, we ask the questions: What has been the historical definition of a pair bond? Has this definition differed across taxonomic groups? What behavioral evidence do we see of pair bonding in these groups? Does this observed evidence alter the definition of pair bonding? Does the observed neurobiology underlying these behaviors affect this definition as well? And finally, what are the upcoming directions in which the study of pair bonding needs to head?
The connective potential of vertebrate vectors responsible for the dispersal of the Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis)
2019, Flora: Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants
Accelerating human intervention has seen the creation of novel ecosystems through intentional planting and adventitious establishment of exotic species. One hundred and fifty years after its commercialisation by the horticultural industry, the Canary Island date palm (Phoenix canariensis) has become one of the most ubiquitous ornamental palm species throughout all temperate zones. Even though it has become naturalised in many parts of the world, colonising natural as well as managed landscapes, little is known about the vectors responsible for dispersal.
This paper reviews the state of knowledge of vertebrate species utilising P. canariensis as habitat and those that feed on the palm’s drupes and disperse their seeds. Globally, P. canariensis forms a major urban habitat for invasive species. The significant dispersers are canids and three families of larger volant birds (Artamidae, Columbidae, and Corvidae). The review demonstrates that the majority of vectors consume the fruit on the tree or on a close-by perch, thereby contributing little to medium or long range dispersal. A few avian and terrestrial species facilitate long-distance dispersal, even though they too deposit the majority of seed close to the source.
The paper postulates a conceptual model where effective dispersal success of a horticultural plant is governed not only by the established factors of distance of dispersal quantity of seeds dispersed and seed viability, but significantly also by the ability of a vector species to span several habitat boundaries (e.g. from urban to production landscapes or remnant vegetation) and to deposit multiple seeds at tightly defined locations.
Effects of gonadectomy on scent-marking behavior of shelter dogs
2019, Journal of Veterinary Behavior
Citation Excerpt :
These findings of no difference between intact and spayed females with respect to likelihood of defecation at either shelter agree with an earlier report for privately owned female Jack Russell terriers (Wirant and McGuire, 2004). Other studies of scent-marking in dogs (McGuire, 2016; McGuire and Bemis, 2017; Sprague and Anisko, 1973) and coyotes (Gese and Ruff, 1997) reported no sex differences in frequency of defecation, which is consistent with what I found at the Tompkins shelter. In feral dog packs, however, placement of feces on conspicuous objects was limited to adult males of high social status (Cafazzo et al., 2012).
In male domestic dogs, castration appears to reduce frequency of sexually dimorphic behaviors, such as mounting and roaming, but results for urine-marking, another highly dimorphic behavior, are less clear. Using two different experimental designs, I studied effects of gonadectomy on scent-marking behavior during leash walks of dogs at two animal shelters in NY (Cortland Community SPCA and Tompkins County SPCA). In the between-dog study, I compared intact males and females and gonadectomized males and females with respect to rate of urination (a highly sexually dimorphic behavior), likelihood of ground-scratching (a somewhat sexually dimorphic behavior), and likelihood of defecation (a sexually monomorphic behavior). In my within-dog study, I compared rate of urination before and after gonadectomy in a subset of males and females. For the between-dog study, I found that castrated males urinated at lower rates than intact males and that spayed females and intact females urinated at similar rates; this pattern characterized dogs at both shelters. Gonadectomy did not influence likelihood of ground-scratching by either males or females at either shelter. For males and females at the Tompkins shelter and females at the Cortland shelter, gonadectomy did not influence likelihood of defecation. However, intact males were more likely to defecate than castrated males at the Cortland shelter. For dogs observed both before and after gonadectomy in the within-dog study, overall rates of urination decreased after castration in males but did not significantly change after spaying in females (sample sizes sufficient for analysis at the Cortland shelter only). Individual differences characterized male behavioral response to castration: while one male showed a very slight increase in mean rate of urination after castration (4%), the remaining sixteen males differed in degree of response, with percentage decreases in mean rate of urination after castration ranging from 14% to 72%. The source of this individual variation remains to be identified. In summary, spaying did not influence urination, ground-scratching, or defecation by female dogs. For male dogs, I found the most robust effects of castration on urine-marking, the most sexually dimorphic of the three scent-marking behaviors studied. This study is the first research based on direct observations of individual dogs to find decreased urine-marking by males after castration.

View all citing articles on Scopus

^☆: Bekoff, M.

^f1: Correspondence: E. M. Gese, National Wildlife Research Center, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Utah State University, Logan, UT 84322-5295, U.S.A. (email: [email protected]).

^f2: R. L. Ruff is at the Department of Wildlife Ecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, U.S.A.

View full text

Regular ArticleScent-marking by coyotes,Canis latrans: the influence of social and ecological factors☆

Abstract

Anim. Behav.

Horm. Behav.

Anim. Behav.

Adv. Study Behav.

Behav. Biol.

Anim. Behav.

Anim. Behav.

Anim. Behav.

Anim. Behav.

Anim. Behav.

Deposition of anal-sac secretions by captive wolves (Canis lupus

J. Mammal.

Ground scratching by male domestic dogs: a composite signal

J. Mammal.

Precopulatory and copulatory behavior in coyotes

J. Mammal.

Scent marking in coyotes

Can. J. Zool.

Social Odours in Mammals

Behavioral ecology of coyotes on the National Elk Refuge, Jackson, Wyoming

Coyotes: Biology, Behavior and Management

The climate of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks

Nat. Park Serv. Occ. Paper

Olfactory communication in mammals

A. Rev. Ecol. Syst.

The Carnivores

Evolution of social behavior in canids

Home range and habitat use of coyotes in southeastern Colorado

J. Wildl. Mgmt

Foraging ecology of coyotes (Canis latrans

Can. J. Zool.

Regular Article
Scent-marking by coyotes,Canis latrans: the influence of social and ecological factors☆