acta ethologica

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 209–220 | Cite as

Factors influencing intergroup agonistic behaviour in free-ranging domestic dogs (Canis familiaris)

  • Sunil Kumar PalEmail author
Original Paper


We investigated the effects of sex, age, season and competitive context on the intergroup agonistic behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris). Data were collected in different places to record competitive cooperative behaviour during intergroup conflicts. Observations of 21 free-ranging dogs belonging to four neighbouring groups were made in Katwa town, India. Throughout the 12-month study period, 85 % of all intergroup agonistic interactions recorded were aggressive and 15 % submissive. Intergroup aggressive interactions were more frequent during the late monsoon months when the females were in oestrus, while submissive interactions reached a peak during the winter months when the females were lactating. Adult dogs, particularly males, displayed a higher rate of aggressive behaviour than other age classes, whereas juvenile dogs, particularly males, displayed the highest rate of submissive behaviour. Male dogs were observed to perform more agonistic behaviours in mating contexts and at the boundaries of their territories, whereas female dogs displayed more agonistic behaviours in feeding contexts and in the vicinity of the den. Both aggressive and submissive patterns displayed by the dogs varied with the competitive contexts. The most frequently observed category of aggressive behaviour was ‘barking, growling and snarling’ and submissive behavioural patterns were displayed frequently by ‘lips retracted in a submissive grin’. The striking feature of this study was that in most cases, more than one dog participated in aggressive conflicts. Such cooperative defense predominantly occurred at the boundaries of territory. Group home range size was largest during the late monsoon months and during the winter months.


Free-ranging domestic dogs Seasonal home range Intergroup agonistic behaviour Seasonal variations Competitive contexts Behavioural patterns 



I thank Dr Roberto Bonanni, Dr Simona Cafazzo and Prof. E. Font who read the drafts of this paper and improved its quality. I am sincerely grateful to the editor, associate editor and also to the anonymous referees for advice and comments on the earlier drafts of this paper. Special thanks to Dr. Subhadip Pal, Dept. of Statistics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida who helped with data analysis. Finally, thanks are due to Subhadip Pal (PhD student), Dip Narayan Dey (M.Sc.), Arindam Mondal (PhD) and Sohan Chatterjee (B.Sc.) who helped to collect data, and also to the local people who helped to locate the dogs.


  1. Abrantes R (1997) Dog language. Wakan Tanka, NapervilleGoogle Scholar
  2. Altmann J (1974) Observational study of behaviour: sampling methods. Behaviour 49:227–267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck AM (1973) The ecology of stray dogs: a study of free-ranging urban animals. York Press, Baltimore, MD, p 98Google Scholar
  4. Beck AM (1975) The ecology of feral and free-roving dogs in Baltimore. In: Fox MW (ed) The wild Canids: their systematics, behavioural ecology and evolution. Van Nostrand-Reinhold, New York, pp 380–390Google Scholar
  5. Bekoff M (1979) Scent-marking by free-ranging domestic dogs. Biol Behav 4:123–139Google Scholar
  6. Bekoff M, Wells MC (1986) Social ecology and behavior of coyotes. Adv Study Behav 16:251–338Google Scholar
  7. Berman M, Dunbar I (1983) The social behaviour of suburban dogs. Appl Anim Ethol 10:5–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boitani L, Francisci F, Ciucci P, Andreoli G (1995) Population biology and ecology of feral dogs in Central Italy. In: Serpell J (ed) The domestic dog: its evolution, behaviour and interactions with people. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 217–244Google Scholar
  9. Bonanni R, Valsecchi P, Natoli E (2010a) Pattern of individual participation and cheating in conflicts between groups of free-ranging dogs. Anim Behav 79:957–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bonanni R, Cafazzo S, Valsecchi P, Natoli E (2010b) Effect of affiliative and agonistic relationships on leadership behaviour in free-ranging dogs. Anim Behav 79:981–991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonanni R, Natoli E, Cafazzo S, Valsecchi P (2011) Free-ranging dogs assess the quantity of opponents in inter-group conflicts. Anim Cogn 14:103–115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bradshaw JWS, Nott HMR (1995) Social and communication behavior of companion dogs. In: Serpell J (ed) The domestic dog: its evolution, behaviour and interactions with people. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 115–130Google Scholar
  13. Burt WH (1943) Territoriality and home range concepts as applied to mammals. J Mammal 24:346–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cafazzo S (2007) Dinamiche sociali in un gruppo di cani domestici (Canis lupus familiaris) liberi in ambiente suburbano. PhD thesis, Univ. of Parma, Parma, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  15. Cafazzo S, Natoli E, Valsecchi P (2012) Scent-marking behaviour in a pack of free-ranging domestic dogs. Ethology 118:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carr GM (1985) Behavioural ecology of feral domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) in Central Italy. Proceedings of the XIX International Ethological Conference. Toulouse, France, Abstract 267Google Scholar
  17. Chen SC, Tang FC, Lee HS, Yen CH, Lee MC (2000) An epidemiologic study of dog bites among postmen in central Taiwan. Chang Gung Med J 23:277–283PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Daniels TJ (1983) The social organisation of free-ranging urban dogs. I. Non-estrous social behaviour. Appl Anim Ethol 10:341–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Daniels TJ, Bekoff M (1989a) Population and social biology of free-ranging dogs, Canis familiaris. J Mammal 70:754–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Daniels TJ, Bekoff M (1989b) Spatial and temporal resource use by feral and abandoned dogs. Ethology 81:300–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Font E (1987) Spacing and social organization: urban stray dogs revisited. Appl Anim Behav Sci 17:319–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fox MW (1971) Behaviour of wolves, dogs and related Canids. Harper and Row, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Fox MW, Beck AM, Blackman E (1975) Behaviour and ecology of a small group of urban dogs (Canis familiaris). Appl Anim Ethol 1:119–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frank LG (1986) Social organization of the spotted hyena Crocuta crocuta; II, Dominant and reproduction. Anim Behav 34:1510–1527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gese EM (2001) Territorial defense by coyotes (Canis latrans) in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming: who, how, where, when, and why. Can J Zool 79:980–987CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ghosh B (1981) Some aspects of behavioural ecology of stray dogs (Canis familiaris) in urban and rural environments. PhD thesis, University of Burdwan, West Bengal, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  27. Gittleman JL, Thompson SD (1988) Energy allocation in mammalian reproduction. Am Zool 28:863–877Google Scholar
  28. Hetts S (1999) Pet behavior protocols: what to say, what to do, when to refer. AAHA Press, LakewoodGoogle Scholar
  29. Hsu Y, Sun L (2010) Factors associated with aggressive responses in pet dogs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 123:108–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kawanaka K (1973) Inter-group relations among Japanese monkeys. Primates 14:113–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kim YM, El-Aty AMA, Hwang SH, Lee JH, Lee SM (2009) Risk factors of relinquishment regarding canine behavior problems in South Korea. Tierarztl Wochenschr 122:1–7Google Scholar
  32. Kirk RW (1977) Current veterinary therapy. Vol. VI., Small animal practice. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 1418Google Scholar
  33. Kitchen DM, Cheney DL, Seyfarth RM (2004) Savannah baboons (Papio cynocephalus). Behaviour 141:197–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kitchen AM, Gese EM, Karki SM, Schauster ER (2005) Spatial ecology of swift fox social groups: from group formation to mate loss. J Mammal 86:547–554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kleiman DG, Brady CA (1978) Coyote behavior in the context of recent canid research: problems and perspectives. In: Bekoff M (ed) Coyotes: biology, behavior and management. Academic, New York, pp 163–188Google Scholar
  36. Kottferová J, Mareková J, Jakuba T, Ondrašovič M, Ondrašovičová O (2008) Aggressive behaviour of dogs and its ethological function. Folia Vet 52:73–74Google Scholar
  37. Laundré JW, Keller BL (1984) Home range size of coyotes: a critical review. J Wildl Manag 48:127–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Le Boeuf BJ (1967) Interindividual associations in dogs. Behaviour 29:268–295CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Loudon ASI, Racey PA (1987) Reproductive energetics in mammals. Proceedings of a symposium held at the zoological society of London; 10–11 Apr 1986, Zoological Society of London, Clarendon Press: OxfordGoogle Scholar
  40. Macdonald DW, Carr GM (1995) Variation in dog society: between resource dispersion and social flux. In: Serpell J (ed) The domestic dog: its evolution, behaviour and interactions with people. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 199–216Google Scholar
  41. MacDonald DW, Ball FG, Hough NG (1980) The evaluation of home range size and configuration using radio tracking data. In: Amlaner CJ, MacDonald DW (eds) Handbook of biotelemetry and radio tracking. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 40–426Google Scholar
  42. Manson J, Wrangham R (1991) Inter-group aggression in chimpanzees and humans. Curr Anthropol 32:369–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marijana V, Dordevic M, Brana RD, Ljiljana J, Mirilovic M (2008) Bites to humans caused by stray and owned dogs in belgrade. Acta Vet (Beograd) 58:563–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mech LD (1970) The wolf: the ecology and behaviour of an endangered species. Natural History Press, DoubledayGoogle Scholar
  45. Mech LD (1993) Details of a confrontation between two wild wolves. Can J Zool 71:1900–1903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Milani MM (1986) The body language and emotion of dogs. Morrow, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Moran G, Fentress JC, Golani I (1981) A description of relational patterns of movement during ‘ritualized fighting’ in wolves. Anim Behav 29:1146–1165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Morgan M, Palmer J (2007) Dog bites. BMJ 334:413–417CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. O’Sullivan EN, Jones BR, O’Sullivan K, Hanlon AJ (2008) Characteristics of 234 dog bite incidents in Ireland during 2004 and 2005. VeterinaryGoogle Scholar
  50. Overall KL (1997) Clinical behavioral medicine for small animals. Mosby Year Book, St. LouisGoogle Scholar
  51. Pal SK (2003) Urine marking by free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris) in relation to sex, season, place and posture. Appl Anim Behav Sci 80:45–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pal SK (2005) Parental care in free-ranging dogs, Canis familiaris. Appl Anim Behav Sci 90:31–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pal SK (2008) Maturation and development of social behavior during early ontogeny in free ranging dog puppies in West Bengal, India. Appl Anim Behav Sci 111:95–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pal SK, Ghosh B, Roy S (1998a) Agonistic behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris) in relation to season, sex, age. Appl Anim Behav Sci 59:331–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pal SK, Ghosh B, Roy S (1998b) Dispersal behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris) in relation to age, sex, season and dispersal distance. Appl Anim Behav Sci 61:123–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pal SK, Ghosh B, Roy S (1999) Inter- and intra-sexual behaviour of free-ranging dogs (Canis familiaris). Appl Anim Behav Sci 62:267–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rubin HD, Beck AM (1982) Ecological behavior of free-ranging urban pet dogs. Appl Anim Ethol 8:161–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Saunders G, White CL, Harris S, Rainier JMV (1993) Urban foxes (Vulpes vulpes): food acquisition, time and energy budgeting of a generalized predator. Symp Zool Soc Lond 65:215–234Google Scholar
  59. Schenkel R (1967) Submission: its function in the wolf and dog. Am Zool 7:319–329Google Scholar
  60. Scott JP (1950) The social behavior of dogs and wolves: as illustration of sociobiological systematics. Ann N Y Acad Sci 51:1009–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Scott JP, Fuller JL (1965) Genetics and the social behavior of the dog. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  62. Seidler R, Gese E (2012) Territory fidelity, space use, and survival rates of wild coyotes following surgical sterilization. J Ethol 30:345–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. van Kerkhove (2004) An examination of the use of the ethological perspective for resolving inter-dog aggression problems. APDT Chron Dog 11:10–13Google Scholar
  64. Voigt DR, Macdonald DW (1984) Variation in the spatial and social behavior of the red fox, Vulpes vulpes. Acta Zool Fenn 171:261–265Google Scholar
  65. Wang HP, Tan CL, Gao YF, Li BG (2004) A takeover of resident male in the Sichuan snub-nosed monkey Rhinopithecus roxellana in Qinling Mountains. Acta Zool Sin 50:859–862Google Scholar
  66. White PCL, Harris S (1994) Encounters between red foxes (Voles vulpes): implications for territory maintenance, social cohesion and dispersal. J Anim Ecol 63:315–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Zhang P, Watanabe K, Li BG (2008) Dominance relationships among one-male units in a provisioned free-ranging band of the Sichuan snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus roxellana) in the Qinling Mountains, China. Am J Primatol 70:634–641CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Zhao DP, Li BG, Grove CP, Watanabe K (2008) Impact of male takeover on intra-unit sexual interactions and subsequent interbirth interval of wild Rhinopithecus roxellana. Folia Primatol 79:93–102Google Scholar
  69. Zhao DP, Chen Z, Baoguo LI, Romero T (2013) Sex-specific participation in inter-group conflicts within a multilevel society: the first evidence at the individual level. Integr Zool 8:441–454CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and ISPA 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Katwa Bharati BhabanBurdwanIndia

Personalised recommendations