ReviewAnatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007)2021
What the dingo says about dog domestication.
Review in Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diet of the Dingo in Subtropical Australian Forests: Are Small, Threatened Macropods at Risk?Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- The human-initiated model of wolf domestication - An expansion based on human-dingo relations in Aboriginal Australia.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Dingoes, companions in life and death: The significance of archaeological canid burial practices in Australia.PloS one · 2023Article
- The Role of Socialisation in the Taming and Management of Wild Dingoes by Australian Aboriginal People.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- What the dingo says about dog domestication.Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Worldwide, dogs (Canis familiaris) are certainly the most common domesticate (900 million according to the World Atlas) and are sometimes used as a proxy for human presence. Dogs were the first and therefore arguably most important species ever to be domesticated. It is widely accepted that the domestic dog is a descendent of Pleistocene gray wolves (Canis lupus), possibly of a population now extinct. How can an extant canid, the dingo (Canis dingo or Canis familiaris), whose status as a species and as a domesticate is controversial, improve our understanding of the ancient process of domesticating the dog? Here I review anatomical, behavioral, biogeographic, and molecular evidence on the appropriate status of dingoes in a historical context. Dingoes are now the major apex predator in Australia aside from humans. Different sources of evidence have suggested different times of arrival in Greater Australia for humans and canids and different degrees of intimacy or domestication between humans and canids. Just as domestic dogs are often accorded near-human status, dingoes have special relationships with human families, but reproductively and behaviorally they remain independent. In sum, traits of the dingo reflect its lupine ancestry, a certain degree of accommodation to human company, and unique adaptations to the demands of its habitat. Emphasizing that domestication is a long-term process, not an event, helps clarify the ambiguous status of dingoes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.