Wolf Science Center, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, 1210 Vienna, Austria;
Comparative Cognition, Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, University of Vienna, 1210 Vienna, Austria.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Oct 31;114(44):11793-11798. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1709027114. Epub 2017 Oct 16.
A number of domestication hypotheses suggest that dogs have acquired a more tolerant temperament than wolves, promoting cooperative interactions with humans and conspecifics. This selection process has been proposed to resemble the one responsible for our own greater cooperative inclinations in comparison with our closest living relatives. However, the socioecology of wolves and dogs, with the former relying more heavily on cooperative activities, predicts that at least with conspecifics, wolves should cooperate better than dogs. Here we tested similarly raised wolves and dogs in a cooperative string-pulling task with conspecifics and found that wolves outperformed dogs, despite comparable levels of interest in the task. Whereas wolves coordinated their actions so as to simultaneously pull the rope ends, leading to success, dogs pulled the ropes in alternate moments, thereby never succeeding. Indeed in dog dyads it was also less likely that both members simultaneously engaged in other manipulative behaviors on the apparatus. Different conflict-management strategies are likely responsible for these results, with dogs' avoidance of potential competition over the apparatus constraining their capacity to coordinate actions. Wolves, in contrast, did not hesitate to manipulate the ropes simultaneously, and once cooperation was initiated, rapidly learned to coordinate in more complex conditions as well. Social dynamics (rank and affiliation) played a key role in success rates. Results call those domestication hypotheses that suggest dogs evolved greater cooperative inclinations into question, and rather support the idea that dogs' and wolves' different social ecologies played a role in affecting their capacity for conspecific cooperation and communication.
一些驯化假说表明，狗比狼具有更宽容的气质，促进了与人类和同类的合作互动。这个选择过程被认为类似于导致我们与最亲近的亲属相比更具合作倾向的过程。然而，狼和狗的社会生态学，前者更依赖于合作活动，预测至少在与同类的合作中，狼应该比狗表现得更好。在这里，我们在一个有同类参与的合作拉绳任务中测试了同样被饲养的狼和狗，发现尽管对任务的兴趣相当，但狼的表现优于狗。虽然狼协调它们的行动，以便同时拉绳子的末端，从而取得成功，但狗则在交替的时刻拉绳子，因此从未成功过。事实上，在狗的对偶中，两个成员同时参与设备上的其他操纵行为的可能性也较小。不同的冲突管理策略可能是导致这些结果的原因，狗避免了对设备的潜在竞争，从而限制了它们协调行动的能力。相比之下，狼毫不犹豫地同时操纵绳子，一旦开始合作，它们也很快学会在更复杂的条件下协调。社会动态（等级和关系）在成功率方面起着关键作用。结果对那些认为狗进化出更强的合作倾向的驯化假说提出了质疑，而更支持这样的观点，即狗和狼不同的社会生态环境在影响它们同类合作和沟通的能力方面发挥了作用。
