Editing Dingo (section)

===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 This finding challenges the perception that dingoes are nearly extinct and have been replaced by feral domestic dogs.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/>