Geographic hot spots of dingo genetic ancestry in southeastern Australia despite hybridisation with domestic dogs
Hybridisation resulting from human-driven shifts in species ranges is a global conservation concern. In Australia, hybridisation between dingoes (Canis dingo) and domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) has been identified as an extinction threat to the dingo, and is thought to be particularly widespread in south-eastern Australia. Here, we investigated the extent of hybridisation between dingoes and dogs in a sample of 783 wild-caught canids from eastern New South Wales, using an established 23-microsatellite test. We then mapped the distribution of these samples and identified three areas that are geographic hotspots of high dingo genetic ancestry using geospatial analysis. Between 9 and 23% of the wild canids that we sampled were classified as only having or likely to have only dingo ancestry. Only 0.6% of the wild canids we sampled were classified as having no dingo ancestry. Introgression from domestic dogs into the southeastern dingo gene pool has been extensive, with 76–88% of sampled dingoes carrying some dog ancestry. Spatial analyses revealed several geographic hotspots of high dingo genetic ancestry within north-eastern New South Wales (NSW) where there was a higher than expected prevalence of dingoes with no domestic dog ancestry. A key finding of our study is the observation of several regions where dingoes were largely free of admixture from dogs. There is an ongoing need for evidence-based strategies to reduce human-driven hybridisation by identifying and maintaining natural barriers to reproduction or limiting opportunities for wild-domesticate hybridisation. Globally, legislators and land managers may need to consider less restrictive species definitions to conserve endangered or ecologically significant taxa.
KeywordsIntrogression Canis familiaris Canis dingo Admixture Microsatellites Spatial analysis
The authors acknowledge the contributions of A/Prof Alan Wilton (UNSW) who passed away in 2011, before this manuscript was completed and written. Special thanks to the 23 Dingo/wild dog DNA research project investigators who sourced DNA sample material during the 16 year project period including Brad Nesbitt (principal investigator), Michael Dodkin, Geoffrey James, Bernard Whitehead, Dave McFarlane, Andrew McDougal, David Jenkins, Peter Ellem, and James Baldwin. Thanks to the many collaborators from NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Rural Lands Protection Boards, Livestock Health & Pest Authorities, and NSW Department of Primary Industries who provided wild canid DNA samples for analysis. DNA genotyping carried out as part of this research were principally funded by the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
KMC is a scientific advisor to the Australian Dingo Foundation, New Guinea Highland Wild Dog Foundation and New Guinea Signing Dog Conservation Society. No other interests declared.
- Allen BL, Allen LR, Ballard G, Jackson SM, Fleming PJS (2017) A roadmap to meaningful dingo conservation. Canid Biol Conserv 20:45–56Google Scholar
- Anderson TM, vonHoldt BM, Candille SI, Musiani M, Greco C, Stahler DR, Smith DW, Padhukasahasram B, Randi E, Leonard JA, Bustamante CD, Ostrander EA, Tang H, Wayne RK, Barsh GS (2009) Molecular and evolutionary history of melanism in North American gray wolves. Science 323:1339–1343PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cairns KM, Wilton AN, Ballard JWO (2011) The identification of dingoes in a background of hybrids. In: Urbano KV (ed) Advances in genetics research. Nova Science Publishers, New York, pp 309–327Google Scholar
- Colman N (2015) Morphological variation and ecological interactions of Australia’s apex predator—the dingo (Canis dingo). Western Sydney UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Corbett LK (2001b) The Dingo in Australia and Asia. University of NSW Press, SydneyGoogle Scholar
- Corbett LK (2008) Canis lupus ssp. dingo. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2014.1Google Scholar
- ESRI (2018) ArcGIS Release 10.6. Redlands, CAGoogle Scholar
- Galov A, Fabbri E, Caniglia R, Arbanasić H, Lapalombella S, Florijančić T, Bošković I, Galaverni M, Randi E (2015) First evidence of hybridization between golden jackal (Canis aureus) and domestic dog (Canis familiaris) as revealed by genetic markers. R Soc Open Sci 2:150450PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hinton JW, Heppenheimer E, West KM, Caudill D, Karlin ML, Kilgo JC, Mayer JJ, Miller KV, Walch M, vonHoldt B, Chamberlain MJ (2019) Geographic patterns in morphometric and genetic variation for coyote populations with emphasis on southeastern coyotes. Ecol Evol 9:3389–3404PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jones FW (1921) The status of the dingo. R Soc South Aust 45:254–263Google Scholar
- OEH (2009) Predation and Hybridisation by Feral Dogs, Canis lupus familiaris—key threatening process listing. NSW Scientific Committee—final determination. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/determinations/feraldogsFD.htm. Accessed 04 Feb 2019
- Pritchard JK, Wen X, Falush D (2010) Documentation for structure software: version 2.3. University of Chicago, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- Sacks BN, Brown SK, Stephens D, Pedersen NC, Wu J-T, Berry O (2013) Y chromosome analysis of dingoes and Southeast Asian village dogs suggests a Neolithic continental expansion from Southeast Asia followed by multiple Austronesian dispersals. Mol Biol Evol 13:1265–1275Google Scholar
- Schweizer RM, Durvasula A, Smith J, Vohr SH, Stahler DR, Galaverni M, Thalmann O, Smith DW, Randi E, Ostrander EA, Green RE, Lohmueller KE, Novembre J, Wayne RK (2018) Natural selection and origin of a melanistic allele in North American gray wolves. Mol Biol Evol 35:1190–1209PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Smith BP, Cairns KM, Adams JW, Newsome TM, Fillios M, Deaux EC, Parr WCH, Letnic M, Van Eeden LM, Appleby RG, Bradshaw CJA, Savolainen P, Ritchie EG, Nimmo DG, Archer-lean C, Greenville A, Dickman CR, Watson L, Moseby KE, Doherty TS, Wallach AD, Morrant DS, Crowther MS (2019) Taxonomic status of the Australian dingo: the case for Canis dingo Meyer, 1793. Zootaxa 4564:173–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- vonHoldt BM, Pollinger JP, Lohmueller KE, Han E, Parker HG, Quignon P, Degenhardt JD, Boyko AR, Earl DA, Auton A, Reynolds A, Bryc K, Brisbin A, Knowles JC, Mosher DS, Spady TC, Elkahloun A, Geffen E, Pilot M, Jedrzejewski W, Greco C, Randi E, Bannasch D, Wilton A, Shearman J, Musiani M, Cargill M, Jones PG, Qian Z, Huang W, Ding Z-L, Zhang Y-p, Bustamante CD, Ostrander EA, Novembre J, Wayne RK (2010) Genome-wide SNP and haplotype analyses reveal a rich history underlying dog domestication. Nature 464:898–902PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Zhang S-j, Wang G-D, Ma P, Zhang L-l, Yin T-T, Liu Y-h, Otecko NO, Wang M, Ma Y-p, Wang L, Mao B, Savolainen P, Zhang Y-p (2018) Genomic analysis of dingoes identifies genomic regions under reversible selection during domestication and feralization. bioRxiv, 472084Google Scholar