Journal of Ethology

, Volume 32, Issue 1, pp 15–22 | Cite as

Preference for meat is not innate in dogs

  • Anandarup Bhadra
  • Anindita BhadraEmail author


Indian free-ranging dogs live in a carbohydrate-rich environment as scavengers in and around human settlements. They rarely hunt and consequently do not encounter rich sources of protein. Instead, they have adapted to a diet of primarily carbohydrates. As descendents of the exclusively carnivorous wolves, they are subjected to the evolutionary load of a physiological demand for proteins. To meet their protein needs, they resort to a Rule of Thumb—if it smells like meat, eat it. Pups face high competition from group and non-group members and are in a phase of rapid growth with high protein demands. Following the Rule of Thumb, they can acquire more protein at the cost of increased competition and reduced supplementary non-protein nutrition. However, if the mother supplements their diet with protein-rich regurgitates and/or milk, then the pups can benefit by being generalists. Using a choice test in the field, we show that, while adults have a clear preference for meat, pups have no such preference, and they even eagerly eat degraded protein. Thus, the Rule of Thumb used by adult dogs for efficient scavenging is not innate and needs to be learned. The Rule of Thumb might be acquired by cultural transmission, through exposure to meat in the mother’s regurgitate, or while accompanying her on foraging trips.


Scavengers Dogs Rule of Thumb Innate Pups Cultural transmission 



The experiments were designed and carried out by Anandarup Bhadra (Ar.B.). A.B. supervised the work and co-wrote the paper with Ar.B. Tithi Roy helped with the field work during these experiments. Our experiments comply with the regulations for animal care in India. We thank IISER-K for funding this research.

Supplementary material

10164_2013_388_MOESM1_ESM.doc (678 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 678 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (MP4 21780 kb)


  1. Axelsson E, Ratnakumar A, Arendt M-L et al (2013) The genomic signature of dog domestication reveals adaptation to a starch-rich diet. Nature 000:1–5. doi: 10.1038/nature11837 Google Scholar
  2. Boitani L (1983) Wolf and dog competition in Italy. Acta Zool Fenn 174:259–264Google Scholar
  3. Bonanni R, Valsecchi P, Natoli E (2010) Pattern of individual participation and cheating in conflicts between groups of free-ranging dogs. Anim Behav 79:957–968. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.01.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butler J, Du Toit J, Bingham J (2004) Free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) as predators and prey in rural Zimbabwe: threats of competition and disease to large wild carnivores. Biol Conserv 115:369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cafazzo S, Valsecchi P, Bonanni R, Natoli E (2010) Dominance in relation to age, sex, and competitive contexts in a group of free-ranging domestic dogs. Behav Ecol 21:443–455. doi: 10.1093/beheco/arq001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Campbell R (1976) A note on the use of feed flavour to stimulate the feed intake of weaner pigs. Anim Prod 23:417–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Case LP, Daristotle L, Hayek MG, Raasch MF (2010) Protein requirements. Canine and feline nutrition: a resource for companion animal professionals, 3rd edn. Mosby, MissouriGoogle Scholar
  8. Daniels TJ, Bekoff M (1989) Population and social biology of free-ranging dogs, canis familiaris. J Mammal 70:754–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Balogh K (1993) A dog ecology study in an urban and a semi-rural area of Zambia. Onderstepoort J Vet Res 60:437–443PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Debroy B (2008) Sarama and her children: the dog in Indian myth. Penguin, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  11. Edney A, Smith P (1986) Study of obesity in dogs visiting veterinary practices in the United Kingdom. Vet Rec 118(14):391–396. doi: 10.1136/vr.118.14.391 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ellins S, Catalano S, Schechinger S (1977) Conditioned taste aversion: a field application to coyote predation on sheep. Behav Biol 20:91–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferrell F (1984a) Taste bud morphology in the fetal and neonatal dog. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 8:175–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferrell F (1984b) Effects of restricted dietary flavor experience before weaning on postweaning food preference in puppies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 8:191–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Forbes GJ, Theberge JB (1992) Importance of scavenging on moose by wolves in Algonquin Park, Ontario. ALCES 28:235–241Google Scholar
  16. Fox PF, McSweeney PLH (2003) Milk proteins: general and historical aspects. Advanced dairy chemistry—1 proteins. Springer, Boston, pp 1–48Google Scholar
  17. Galef BG, Henderson PW (1972) Mother’s milk: a determinant of the feeding preferences of weaning rat pups. J Comp Physiol Psychol 78:213–219PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. German A (2006) The growing problem of obesity in dogs and cats. J Nutr 136(7 Suppl):1940S–1946SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Griffin R, Scott G, Cante C (1984) Food preferences of dogs housed in testing-kennels and in consumers’ homes: some comparisons. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 8:253–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hewson-Hughes AK, Hewson-Hughes VL, Colyer A et al (2013) Geometric analysis of macronutrient selection in breeds of the domestic dog, Canis lupus familiaris. Behav Ecol 24:293–304. doi: 10.1093/beheco/ars168 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Houpt KA, Hintz HF, Shepherd P (1978) The role of olfaction in canine food preferences. Chem Senses 3:281–290. doi: 10.1093/chemse/3.3.281 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kato M, Yamamoto H (2003) Survey of the stray dog population and the health education program on the prevention of dog bites and dog-acquired infections: a comparative study in Nepal. Acta Med Okayama 57(5):261–266 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kruuk H, Snell H (1981) Prey selection by feral dogs from a population of marine iguanas (Amblyrhynchus cristatus). J Appl Ecol 18:197–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kuo Z (1967) The dynamics of behavioral development: an epigenetic view. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. LeMagnen J (1967) Habits and food intake. In: Code CF (ed) Handbook of physiology, vol 1. American Physiological Society, Washington, D.C., pp 11–30Google Scholar
  26. Macdonald DW (1983) The ecology of carnivore social behaviour. Nature 301:379–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sen Majumder S, Bhadra A, Ghosh A, Mitra S, Bhattacharjee D, Chatterjee J, Nandi AK, Bhadra A (2013) To be or not to be social: foraging associations of free-ranging dogs in an urban ecosystem. Acta Ethol. doi: 10.1007/s10211-013-0158-0
  28. Malm K, Jensen P (1993) Regurgitation as a weaning strategy—a selective review on an old subject in a new light. Appl Anim Behav Sci 36:47–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Malm K, Jensen P (2010) Weaning and parent-offspring conflict in the domestic dog. Ethology 103:653–664. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.1997.tb00176.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McFarland DJ (1978) Hunger in interaction with other aspects of motivation. In: Booth DA (ed) Hunger models: computable theory of feeding control. Academic, London, pp 375–405Google Scholar
  31. McGreevy P, Thomson P (2005) Prevalence of obesity in dogs examined by Australian veterinary practices and the risk factors involved. Vet Rec 156(22):695–702PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Mech L, Boitani L (2003) Wolves: behaviour, ecology and conservation. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mennella J, Beauchamp G (1994) Early flavor experiences: when do they start? Nutr Today 29(5):25–31Google Scholar
  34. Mistretta CM, Bradley RM (1983) Neural basis of developing salt taste sensation: response changes in fetal, postnatal, and adult sheep. J Comp Neurol 215:199–210. doi: 10.1002/cne.902150207 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mohan V, Radhika G, Sathya RM et al (2009) Dietary carbohydrates, glycaemic load, food groups and newly detected type 2 diabetes among urban Asian Indian population in Chennai, India (Chennai Urban Rural Epidemiology Study 59). Br J Nutr 102:1498–1506. doi: 10.1017/S0007114509990468 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Morey D (1992) Size, shape and development in the evolution of the domestic dog. J Archaeol Sci 19:181–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mugford RA (1977) External influences on the feeding of carnivores. In: Kare MR (ed) The chemical senses and nutrition. Academic, New York, pp 25–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mukai J, Tokuyama E, Ishizaka T et al (2009) The effect of taste–odour interactions on the palatability of nutritional products for liver failure. Asian J Pharm Sci 4:46–55Google Scholar
  39. Nachman M (1959) The inheritance of saccharin preference. J Comp Physiol Psychol 52:451–457PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. National Research Council (2006) Nutrient requirements of dogs and cats. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  41. Oftedal OT (1984) Lactation in the dog: milk composition and intake by puppies. J Nutr 114:803–812PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Ontko JA, Wuthier RE, Phillips PH (1957) The effect of increased dietary fat upon the protein requirement of the growing dog. J Nutr 62:163–169PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Ortega-Pacheco A, Rodriguez-Buenfil JC, Bolio-Gonzalez ME et al (2007) A survey of dog populations in urban and rural areas of Yucatan, Mexico. Anthrozoös 20:261–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pal S (2001) Population ecology of free-ranging urban dogs in West Bengal, India. Acta Theriol 46:69–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pal S (2005) Parental care in free-ranging dogs, Canis familiaris. Appl Anim Behav Sci 90:31–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pal S (2008) Maturation and development of social behaviour during early ontogeny in free-ranging dog puppies in West Bengal, India. Appl Anim Behav Sci 111(1):95–107Google Scholar
  47. Pal SK, Ghosh B, Roy S (1998) Dispersal behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris) in relation to age, sex, season and dispersal distance. Appl Anim Behav Sci 61:123–132. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00185-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pryor KW (2001) Cultural transmission of behavior in animals: how a modern training technology uses spontaneous social imitation in cetaceans and facilitates social imitation in horses and dogs. Behav Brain Sci 24:352. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X01523961 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pyke G (1984) Optimal foraging theory: a critical review. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 15:523–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rathore A (1984) Evaluation of lithium chloride taste aversion in penned domestic dogs. J Wildl Manag 48:1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rozin P (1967) Specific aversions as a component of specific hungers. J Comp Physiol Psychol 64:237–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Scott EM (1946) Self selection of diet I. Selection of purified components. J Nutr 31:397–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Spotte S (2012) Societies of wolves and free-ranging dogs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  54. Thorne C (1995) Feeding behaviour of domestic dogs and the role of experience. In: Serpell J (ed) The domestic dog: its evolution, behaviour and interactions with people. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 103–114Google Scholar
  55. Trivers RL (1974) Parent-offspring conflict. Am Zool 14:249–264. doi: 10.1093/icb/14.1.249 Google Scholar
  56. Vanak AT, Gompper ME (2009) Dietary niche separation between sympatric free-ranging domestic dogs and Indian foxes in Central India. J Mammal 90:1058–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Vanak AT, Thaker M, Gompper ME (2009) Experimental examination of behavioural interactions between free-ranging wild and domestic canids. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:279–287. doi: 10.1007/s00265-009-0845-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Waterlow JC (1986) Metabolic adaptation to low intakes of energy and protein. Annu Rev Nutr 6:495–526. doi: 10.1146/ PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Weech AA, Goettsch E, Reeves EB (1935) Nutritional edema in the dog: I. Development of hypoproteinemia on a diet deficient in protein. J Exp Med 61:299–317. doi: 10.1084/jem.61.3.299 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer Japan 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Behaviour and Ecology Lab, Department of Biological SciencesIndian Institute of Science Education and ResearchCalcuttaIndia

Personalised recommendations