Skip to main content

Response to short-lived human overcrowding by free-ranging dogs

Abstract

Interaction with its immediate environment determines the ecology of an organism. Short-lived perturbations in the habitat can adversely affect both wild and domesticated species. When such disturbances are unpredictable, they are more challenging to tackle. Therefore, specific strategies become essential for species to overcome adversities that can alter their dynamics. Species living in the proximity of humans experience significant anthropogenic disturbances. Response to such a disturbance, facilitated by human overcrowding, was studied in an urban-adapted species. Free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris) found in developing countries can inhabit both urban and rural areas. Dogs present in urban habitats experience tremendous anthropogenic pressure. It is known that human flux can predict variability in their behavior in different ‘microhabitats’. We investigated the effect of a sudden massive surge in human footfall, during a major festival, on their abundance, distribution and behavior. While both abundance and general activity levels declined, vigilance behavior heightened during the festival. The behavioral activity was restored post-event, but dog abundance remained significantly reduced compared to pre-festival levels. Furthermore, we found variations in dog distribution across the sessions with higher dispersion during the festival. Conclusively, this study provides substantial quantitative evidence on the extent to which humans can influence even the behavior of animals well-adapted to urban environments.

Significance statement

Changes in the immediate environment drive organisms to build efficient adaptive strategies. These changes could be both natural, like flood and storm, or anthropogenic, like human overcrowding. The latter especially bestows immense stress on urban living animals, i.e., those that live in close proximity to human settlements. Using an observational study, we show that a sudden surge in human footfall negatively impacts a highly urban-adapted animal, the free-ranging dogs. Dogs lower behavioral activity, become more vigilant and modify their spatial distribution lowering their abundance in such areas. Though short-lived in nature, these disturbances can leave a long-term residual impact on their population. In conclusion, sudden human-induced perturbations can impact even those animals that are considered highly adapted to urban conditions. They are seen to adopt varied strategies to withstand such disturbances in their immediate environment, thus altering their behavioral dynamics.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the DRYAD repository: Bhadra, Anindita; Bhattacharjee, Debottam (2021), Data for: Surge in human flux affects dogs, Dryad, Dataset, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.kkwh70s3p

References

  1. Acevedo-Whitehouse K, Duffus ALJ (2009) Effects of environmental change on wildlife health. Phil Trans R Soc B 364:3429–3438

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Altmann J (1974) Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour 49:227–266

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Softw 67:1–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bels V (ed) (2006) Feeding in domestic vertebrates: from structure to behaviour. CABI, Wallingford, pp 156–178

    Google Scholar 

  5. Berger A, Barthel LM, Rast W, Hofer H, Gras P (2020) Urban hedgehog behavioural responses to temporary habitat disturbance versus permanent fragmentation. Animals 11:2109

  6. Bhadra A, Bhattacharjee D, Paul M, Singh A, Gade PR, Shrestha P, Bhadra A (2016) The meat of the matter: a rule of thumb for scavenging dogs? Ethol Ecol Evol 28:427–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bhattacharjee D, Bhadra A (2020) Humans dominate the social interaction networks of urban free-ranging dogs in India. Front Psychol 11:2153

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bhattacharjee D, Sau S, Das J, Bhadra A (2017) Free-ranging dogs prefer petting over food in repeated interactions with unfamiliar humans. J Exp Biol 220:4654–4660

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bhattacharjee D, Sau S, Bhadra A (2018) Free-ranging dogs understand human intentions and adjust their behavioral responses accordingly. Front Ecol Evol 6:232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bhattacharjee D, Sarkar R, Sau S, Bhadra A (2020a) Sociability of Indian free-ranging dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) varies with human movement in urban areas. J Comp Psychol 135:89–97

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bhattacharjee D, Sau S, Bhadra A (2020b) ‘Bolder’ together — response to human social cues in groups of free-ranging dogs. Behaviour 157:363–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bivand R, Keitt T, Rowlingson B, Pebesma E, Sumner M, Hijmans R (2018) rgdal: bindings for the geospatial data abstraction library 2017. R package version 0.8–13. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rgdal

  13. Bonanni R, Natoli E, Cafazzo S, Valsecchi P (2011) Free-ranging dogs assess the quantity of opponents in intergroup conflicts. Anim Cogn 14:103–115

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Butler J, Brown W, du Toit J (2018) Anthropogenic food subsidy to a commensal carnivore: the value and supply of human faeces in the diet of free-ranging dogs. Animals 8:67

    PubMed Central  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cote J, Clobert J, Poloni LM, Haussy C, Meylan S (2010) Food deprivation modifies corticosterone-dependent behavioural shifts in the common lizard. Gen Comp Endocr 166:142–151

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dickman CR, Doncaster CP (1989) The ecology of small mammals in urban habitats. II. demography and dispersal. J Anim Ecol 58(1):119. https://doi.org/10.2307/4989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Evans JS (2020) spatialEco. R package version 1.3–1. https://github.com/jeffreyevans/spatialEco

  18. Gaynor KM, Hojnowski CE, Carter NH, Brashares JS (2018) The influence of human disturbance on wildlife nocturnality. Science 360:1232–1235

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Goltstein PM, Reinert S, Glas A, Bonhoeffer T, Hübener M (2018) Food and water restriction lead to differential learning behaviors in a head-fixed two-choice visual discrimination task for mice. PLoS One 13:e0204066

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gómez-Rubio V (2016) Spatial point patterns: methodology and applications with R. J Stat Softw 75:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Grimm NB, Faeth SH, Golubiewski NE, Redman CL, Wu J, Bai X, Briggs JM (2008) Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319:756–760

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hartig F (2020) DHARMa: Residual diagnostics for hierarchical regression models. http://florianhartig.github.io/DHARMa/

  23. Höjesjö J (1999) Behavioural and heart rate responses to food limitation and predation risk: an experimental study on rainbow trout. J Fish Biol 55:1009–1019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jacob J (2003) The response of small mammal populations to flooding. Mamm Biol 68:102–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kerley GIH, Kowalczyk R, Cromsigt JPGM (2012) Conservation implications of the refugee species concept and the European bison: king of the forest or refugee in a marginal habitat? Ecography 35:519–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Koolhaas JM, Korte SM, de Boer SF, van der Vegt BJ, van Reenen CG, Hopster H, de Jong IC, Ruis MA, Blokhuis HJ (1999) Coping styles in animals: current status in behavior and stress-physiology. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 23:925–935

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lizée M-H, Mauffrey J-F, Tatoni T, Deschamps-Cottin M (2011) Monitoring urban environments on the basis of biological traits. Ecol Indic 11:353–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK (2015) Adaptation and adaptedness of organisms to urban environments. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 46:261–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Miller RS (1967) Pattern and process in competition. Adv Ecol Res 4:1–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Moore DA, Carpenter TE (1999) Spatial analytical methods and geographic information systems: use in health research and epidemiology. Epidemiol Rev 21:143–161

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Neuman-Lee LA, Bobby Fokidis H, Spence AR, van der Walt M, Smith GD, Durham S, French SS (2015) Food restriction and chronic stress alter energy use and affect immunity in an infrequent feeder. Funct Ecol 29:1453–1462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pal SK (2015) Factors influencing intergroup agonistic behaviour in free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris). Acta Ethol 18:209–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Pal SK, Ghosh B, Roy S (1998) Agonistic behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris) in relation to season, sex and age. Appl Anim Behav Sci 59:331–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Patrick D, Carlo R, Paul CDJ (2001) Field test for environmental correlates of dispersal in hedgehogs Erinaceus europaeus. J Anim Ecol 70:33–46

    Google Scholar 

  35. Paul M, Sen Majumder S, Sau S, Nandi AK, Bhadra A (2016) High early life mortality in free-ranging dogs is largely influenced by humans. Sci Rep 6:19641

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rast W, Barthel LMF, Berger A (2019) Music festival makes hedgehogs move: how individuals cope behaviorally in response to human-induced stressors. Animals 10:2109

    Google Scholar 

  37. R Development Core Team (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/

  38. Rowland NE (2007) Food or fluid restriction in common laboratory animals: balancing welfare considerations with scientific inquiry. Comp Med 57:149–160

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sen Majumder S, Bhadra A (2015) When love is in the air: Understanding why dogs tend to mate when it rains. PLoS One 10(12):e0143501. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143501

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Sen Majumder S, Bhadra A, Ghosh A, Mitra S, Bhattacharjee D, Chatterjee J, Nandi AK, Bhadra A (2014) To be or not to be social: foraging associations of free-ranging dogs in an urban ecosystem. Acta Ethol 17:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sen Majumder S, Paul M, Bhadra A (2016) Denning habits of free-ranging dogs reveal preference for human proximity. Sci Rep 6:32014

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Serpell J (1995) The domestic dog. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  43. Shochat E, Warren PS, Faeth SH, McIntyre NE, Hope D (2006) From patterns to emerging processes in mechanistic urban ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 21:186–191

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Shubhro N, Udit M (2019) Not just fun, Kolkata’s Durga puja is serious business worth Rs 15,000 crore. The Times of India.  https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/not-just-fun-kolkatas-durga-puja-is-serious-business-worth-rs-15000-cr/articleshow/71549101.cms

  45. Slabbekoorn H, Peet M (2003) Birds sing at a higher pitch in urban noise. Nature 424:267

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Stickel LF (1948) Observations on the effect of flood on animals. Ecology 29:505–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Waser PM (1985) Does competition drive dispersal? Ecology 66:1170–1175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Wingfield JC (2003) Control of behavioural strategies for capricious environments. Anim Behav 66:807–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wingfield JC (2013) Ecological processes and the ecology of stress: the impacts of abiotic environmental factors. Funct Ecol 27:37–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Zollinger SA, Slater PJB, Nemeth E, Brumm H (2017) Higher songs of city birds may not be an individual response to noise. Proc R Soc B 284:20170602

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Mr Shubhra Sau for assistance during data collection. The authors would like to sincerely thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and productive comments. The authors would also like to acknowledge the Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Kolkata for providing infrastructural support. DB would like to thank DST INSPIRE for providing his doctoral fellowship.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

DB and AB conceived the idea and designed the study. DB carried out the field experiments, and did data curation and analysis. DB wrote the first draft of the manuscript. AB edited the manuscript and supervised the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anindita Bhadra.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

The study design did not violate the Animal Ethics regulations of the Government of India (Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, Amendment 1982). The protocol for the experiment was approved by the IISER Kolkata Animal Ethics Committee (approval no. 1385/ac/10/CPCSEA).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is a contribution to the Topical Collection Using behavioral ecology to explore adaptive responses to anthropogenic change – Guest Editors: Jan Lindström, Constantino Macias Garcia, Caitlin Gabor

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (XLSX 52 KB)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 1.88 MB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bhattacharjee, D., Bhadra, A. Response to short-lived human overcrowding by free-ranging dogs. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 75, 111 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-021-03052-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Anthropogenic disturbance
  • Behavior
  • Dogs
  • Human overcrowding
  • Urban-adapted species