Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Dingo
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==Conservation of purebreds== Until 2004, the dingo was categorised as of "least concern" on the [[IUCN Red List|Red List of Threatened Species]]. In 2008, it was recategorised as [[Vulnerable species|"vulnerable"]], following the decline in numbers to around 30% of "pure" dingoes, due to [[crossbreed]]ing with domestic dogs.<ref name="iucn">{{cite iucn|author=Corbett, L.K.|year=2008|url=https://www.iucnredlist.org/details/41585/0|title=''Canis lupus ssp. dingo''|access-date=1 July 2012}}</ref> In 2018, the IUCN regarded the dingo as a feral dog and discarded it from the Red List.<ref name=Boitani2018/> Dingoes are reasonably abundant in large parts of Australia, but there is some argument that they are endangered due to interbreeding with other dogs in many parts of their range.<ref name="iucn"/> Dingoes receive varying levels of protection in conservation areas such as national parks and natural reserves in New South Wales, the Northern Territory and Victoria, [[Arnhem Land]] and other Aboriginal lands, [[World Heritage Site|UNESCO World Heritage Sites]], and the whole of the Australian Capital Territory.{{cn|date=April 2024}} In some states, dingoes are regarded as declared pests and landowners are allowed to control the local populations. Throughout Australia, all other wild dogs are considered pests.{{cn|date=April 2024}} [[File:Canis lupus dingo 2.jpg|thumb|right|Female dingo with a tagged ear on Fraser Island]] Fraser Island is a 1,840 square kilometre [[World Heritage Site]] located off Australia's eastern coast. The island is home to a genetically distinct population of dingoes that are free of dog [[introgression]], estimated to number 120.<ref name=oneill2017/> These dingoes are unique because they are closely related to the southeastern dingoes but share a number of genes with the New Guinea singing dog and show some evidence of admixture with the northwestern dingoes.<ref name=cairns2016/> Because of their conservation value, in February 2013, a report on Fraser Island dingo management strategies was released, with options including ending the intimidation of dingoes, tagging practice changes and regular veterinarian checkups, as well as a permanent dingo [[Animal sanctuary|sanctuary]] on the island.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10868207 |title=Dingo sanctuary considered for Fraser Island |date=27 February 2013 |work=[[The New Zealand Herald]] |access-date=27 February 2013 |archive-date=28 February 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130228061411/http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10868207 |url-status=live }}</ref> According to DNA examinations from 2004, the dingoes of Fraser Island are "pure", as opposed to dingo–dog [[Hybrid (biology)|hybrids]].<ref>{{cite web|author=Newby, Jonica|title=Last of the Dingoes|url=http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1335391.htm|publisher=Australian Broadcasting Corporation|date=31 March 2005|access-date=8 May 2009|archive-date=23 April 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090423124809/http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1335391.htm|url-status=live}}</ref> However, skull measurements from the mid-1990s had a different result.<ref name="Queensland Schaedel">{{cite journal|last1=Woodall|first1=PF|last2=Pavlov|first2=P|last3=Twyford|first3=KL|title=Dingoes in Queensland, Australia: skull dimensions and the indenity of wild canids|journal=Wildlife Research|volume=23|pages=581–7|year=1996|doi=10.1071/WR9960581|issue=5}}</ref> A 2013 study showed that dingoes living in the Tanami Desert are among the "purest" in Australia.<ref>{{cite news|last=Brown|first=Carmen|title=Tanami dingoes among purest in Australia|url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-04/ntch-tanami-dingo-purity/4729046|access-date=6 June 2013|newspaper=ABC Rural|date=4 June 2013|archive-date=6 June 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130606164436/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-04/ntch-tanami-dingo-purity/4729046|url-status=live}}</ref> Groups that have devoted themselves to the conservation of the "pure" dingo by using breeding programs include the ''Australian Native Dog Conservation Society'' and the ''Australian Dingo Conservation Association''. Presently, the efforts of the dingo conservation groups are considered to be ineffective because most of their dogs are untested or are known to be hybrids.<ref name="canid"/> Dingo conservation efforts focus primarily on preventing interbreeding between dingoes and other domestic dogs in order to conserve the population of pure dingoes. This is extremely difficult and costly. Conservation efforts are hampered by the fact that it is not known how many pure dingoes still exist in Australia. Steps to conserve the pure dingo can only be effective when the identification of dingoes and other domestic dogs is absolutely reliable, especially in the case of living specimens. Additionally, conservation efforts are in conflict with control measures. Conservation of pure and survivable dingo populations is promising in remote areas, where contact with humans and other domestic dogs is rare. Under New South Wales state policy in parks, reserves and other areas not used by agriculture, these populations are only to be controlled when they pose a threat to the survival of other native species. The introduction of "dog-free" buffer zones around areas with pure dingoes is regarded as a realistic method to stop interbreeding. This is enforced to the extent that all wild dogs can be killed outside the conservation areas. However, studies from the year 2007 indicate that even an intensive control of core areas is probably not able to stop the process of interbreeding.<ref>{{cite web |title=Predation and Hybridisation by Feral Dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) – proposed key threatening process listing |url=http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/feraldogspd.htm |publisher=New South Wales Government |date=29 August 2008 |access-date=13 May 2009 |archive-date=11 January 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120111175057/http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/feraldogspd.htm |url-status=live }}</ref> According to the Dingo Discovery Sanctuary and Research Centre, many studies are finding a case for the re-introduction of the dingo into previously occupied areas in order to return some balance to badly degraded areas as a result of "unregulated and ignorant farming practices".<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.dingofoundation.org/ |title=Dingo Discovery Research Centre |website=dingofoundation.org |access-date=2018-05-31 |archive-date=23 May 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180523053408/http://www.dingofoundation.org/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Dingo densities have been measured at up to 3 per square kilometre (0.8/sq mi) in both the [[Guy Fawkes River]] region of New South Wales and in [[South Australia]] at the height of a [[Rabbit plagues in Australia|rabbit plague]].<ref name="impact"/> ===Hybridisation=== {{Main|Dingo–dog hybrid}} [[File:Dingo and hybrid distribution.jpg|thumb|Broad distribution map of dingoes and [[Dingo–dog hybrid|dingo–dog hybrids]] showing percent purity<ref name=corbett1995C10/>]] [[File:Dingo or maybe crossbreed.jpg|thumb|right|Wild dog with atypical colouration, possibly a hybrid]] In 2023, a study of 402 wild and captive dingoes using 195,000 points across the dingo genome indicates that past studies of hybridisation were over-estimated and that pure dingoes are more common than they were originally thought to be.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Genome-wide variant analyses reveal new patterns of admixture and population structure in Australian dingoes |year=2023 |doi=10.1111/mec.16998 |last1=Cairns |first1=Kylie M. |last2=Crowther |first2=Mathew S. |last3=Parker |first3=Heidi G. |last4=Ostrander |first4=Elaine A. |last5=Letnic |first5=Mike |journal=Molecular Ecology |volume=32 |issue=15 |pages=4133–4150 |pmid=37246949 |pmc=10524503 |bibcode=2023MolEc..32.4133C |s2cid=258960891 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Purebred dingoes more common than researchers thought, genetic study finds|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-30/research-shows-dingoes-are-more-purebred-than-thought/102409812|access-date=30 May 2023|archive-date=30 May 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230530074758/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-30/research-shows-dingoes-are-more-purebred-than-thought/102409812|url-status=live}}</ref> In 2021, DNA testing of over 5,000 wild-living canines from across Australia found that 31 were feral domestic dogs and 27 were [[F1 hybrid|first generation hybrids]]. This finding challenges the perception that dingoes are nearly extinct and have been replaced by feral domestic dogs.<ref name=Cairns2021c/> Coat colour cannot be used to distinguish hybrids.<ref name=Cairns2021/> Dingo-like domestic dogs and dingo-hybrids can be generally distinguished by the more dog-typical kind of barking that exists among the hybrids, and differences in the breeding cycle,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Catling|first1=PC|last2=Corbett|first2=LK|last3=Newsome|first3=AE|title=Reproduction in captive and wild dingoes (''Canis familiaris dingo'') in temperate and arid environments of Australia|journal=Wildlife Research|volume=19|pages=195–209|year=1992|doi=10.1071/WR9920195|issue=2}}</ref> certain skull characteristics,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Newsome|first1=AE|last2=Corbett|first2=LK|last3=Carpenter|first3=SM|title=The Identity of the Dingo I. Morphological Discriminants of Dingo and Dog Skulls|journal=Australian Journal of Zoology|volume=28|pages=615–25|year=1980|doi=10.1071/ZO9800615|issue=4}}</ref> and genetic analyses<ref name="sanctuary">{{cite web|author=Wilton, Alan |title=Genetic Diversity in the Dingo|url=http://www.dingosanctuary.com.au/dna%5B1%5D.htm|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040219224138/http://www.dingosanctuary.com.au/dna%5B1%5D.htm|archive-date=2004-02-19|publisher=dingosanctuary|access-date=14 May 2009}}</ref> can be used for differentiation. Despite all the characteristics that can be used for distinguishing between dingoes and other domestic dogs, there are two problems that should not be underestimated. First, there is no real clarity regarding at what point a dog is regarded as a "pure" dingo,<ref name="defpure">{{cite web|author1=Brad Purcell |author2=Robert Mulley |author3=Robert Close |title=Genetic characterisation of dingoes in the Blue Mountains world heritage area|url=http://www.invasiveanimals.com/downloads/Final-proceedings-with-cover.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090424014424/http://www.invasiveanimals.com/downloads/Final-proceedings-with-cover.pdf|archive-date=24 April 2009|publisher=Invasive Animals CRC|work=14th Australasian Vertebrate Pest Conference|page=140|location=Darwin|year=2008|access-date=13 May 2009}}</ref> and, secondly, no distinguishing feature is completely reliable — it is not known which characteristics permanently remain under the conditions of natural selection. There are two main opinions regarding this process of interbreeding. The first, and likely most common, position states that the "pure" dingo should be preserved via strong controls of the wild dog populations, and only "pure" or "nearly-pure" dingoes should be protected.<ref>{{cite web|title=A Draft Dingo Management Strategy for Fraser Island|url=http://www.fido.org.au/DingoManagement.html|publisher=Fraser Island Defenders Organization|access-date=14 May 2009|archive-date=27 October 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091027163858/http://www.fido.org.au/DingoManagement.html|url-status=live}}</ref> The second position is relatively new and is of the opinion that people must accept that the dingo has changed and that it is impossible to bring the "pure" dingo back. Conservation of these dogs should therefore be based on where and how they live, as well as their cultural and ecological role, instead of concentrating on precise definitions or concerns about "genetic purity".<ref name="wilddog">{{cite journal|last1=Daniels|first1=Mike J.|last2=Corbett|first2=Laurie|title=Redefining introgressed protected mammals: when is a wildcat a wild cat and a dingo a wild dog?|journal=Wildlife Research|volume=30|pages=213–8|year=2003|doi=10.1071/WR02045|issue=3}}</ref> Both positions are controversially discussed. Due to this interbreeding, there is a wider range of fur colours, skull shapes and body size in the modern-day wild dog population than in the time before the arrival of the Europeans. Over the course of the last 40 years, {{when|date=May 2014}} there has been an increase of about 20% in the average wild dog body size.<ref>{{cite web|author1=Spencer, Ricky-John |author2=Lapidge, Steven J. |author3=Dall, David |author4=Humphrys, Simon |title=Bringing out the Mongrel in Australian Dingoes: The Evolution of Wild Dog Body Size|url=http://www.invasiveanimals.com/downloads/Final-proceedings-with-cover.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090116162534/http://www.invasiveanimals.com/downloads/Final-proceedings-with-cover.pdf|archive-date=2009-01-16|publisher=Inavisive Animals CRC|work=14th Australasian Vertebrate Pest Conference|page=149|date=10–13 June 2008|access-date=10 April 2009}}</ref> It is currently unknown whether, in the case of the disappearance of "pure" dingoes, remaining hybrids would alter the predation pressure on other animals. It is also unclear what kind of role these hybrids would play in the Australian ecosystems. However, it is unlikely that the dynamics of the various ecosystems will be excessively disturbed by this process.<ref name="impact"/> In 2011, a total of 3,941 samples were included in the first continent-wide DNA study of wild dogs. The study found that 46% were pure dingoes which exhibited no dog [[alleles]] (gene expressions). There was evidence of hybridisation in every region sampled. In Central Australia only 13% were hybrids; however, in southeastern Australia 99% were hybrids or feral dogs. Pure dingo distribution was 88% in the Northern Territory, intermediate numbers in Western Australia, South Australia and Queensland, and 1% in New South Wales and Victoria. Almost all wild dogs showed some dingo ancestry,<ref name=stephens2011/><ref name=parr2016/> with only 3% of dogs showing less than 80% dingo ancestry. This indicates that domestic dogs have a low survival rate in the wild or that most hybridisation is the result of roaming dogs that return to their owners. No populations of feral dogs have been found in Australia.<ref name=stephens2011/> In 2016, a three dimensional [[Morphometrics#Landmark-based geometric morphometrics|geometric morphometric analysis]] of the skulls of dingoes, dogs and their hybrids found that dingo–dog hybrids exhibit morphology closer to the dingo than to the parent group dog. Hybridisation did not push the unique ''Canis dingo'' cranial morphology towards the wolf phenotype, therefore hybrids cannot be distinguished from dingoes based on cranial measures. The study suggests that the wild dingo morphology is dominant when compared with the recessive dog breed morphology, and concludes that although hybridisation introduces dog DNA into the dingo population, the native cranial morphology remains resistant to change.<ref name=parr2016/>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)