Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25541983›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Effects of sex and reproductive state on interactions between free-roaming domestic dogs.

Jessica Sparkes, Gerhard Körtner, Guy Ballard, Peter J S Fleming, Wendy Y Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Can intake data inform on impacts of repeated subsidized onsite spay-neuter clinics for dogs?The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Are Tourists Facilitators of the Movement of Free-Ranging Dogs?Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jessica SparkesSchool of Environmental and Rural Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, Australia; Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, Biosecurity New South Wales, Armidale, Australia; Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Armidale, Australia.
Gerhard KörtnerSchool of Environmental and Rural Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, Australia; Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, Biosecurity New South Wales, Armidale, Australia; Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Armidale, Australia.
Guy BallardSchool of Environmental and Rural Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, Australia; Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, Biosecurity New South Wales, Armidale, Australia; Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Armidale, Australia.
Peter J S FlemingSchool of Environmental and Rural Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, Australia; Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, Biosecurity New South Wales, Orange, Australia; Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Armidale, Australia.
Wendy Y BrownSchool of Environmental and Rural Sciences, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Free-roaming dogs (Canis familiaris) are common worldwide, often maintaining diseases of domestic pets and wildlife. Management of these dogs is difficult and often involves capture, treatment, neutering and release. Information on the effects of sex and reproductive state on intraspecific contacts and disease transmission is currently lacking, but is vital to improving strategic management of their populations. We assessed the effects of sex and reproductive state on short-term activity patterns and contact rates of free-roaming dogs living in an Australian Indigenous community. Population, social group sizes and rates of contact were estimated from structured observations along walked transects. Simultaneously, GPS telemetry collars were used to track dogs' movements and to quantify the frequency of contacts between individual animals. We estimated that the community's dog population was 326 ± 52, with only 9.8 ± 2.5% confined to a house yard. Short-term activity ranges of dogs varied from 9.2 to 133.7 ha, with males ranging over significantly larger areas than females. Contacts between two or more dogs occurred frequently, with entire females and neutered males accumulating significantly more contacts than spayed females or entire males. This indicates that sex and reproductive status are potentially important to epidemiology, but the effect of these differential contact rates on disease transmission requires further investigation. The observed combination of unrestrained dogs and high contact rates suggest that contagious disease would likely spread rapidly through the population. Pro-active management of dog populations and targeted education programs could help reduce the risks associated with disease spread.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, WildAustraliaDog DiseasesDogsFemaleMaleReproductionTelemetry

Identifiers

PMID25541983
PMCPMC4277450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.