Testing coyotes in an object choice task following a human gesture

Abstract

Interspecific communication is often studied by determining a species ability to respond to human gestures. Results emerging from pet versus free-roaming domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) elucidate differences in the behavioral changes that occur based on life experience and human socialization in the development of social cognition. Additional research on wild species of canids raised with minimal levels of human socialization may provide insight into the importance of human socialization in the ability of non-human animals to correctly respond to a human gesture. We used captive coyotes (Canis latrans) to test whether coyotes could use human pointing gestures to succeed in an object-choice task. We specifically tested two groups of coyotes; both were minimal human socialization but one group was coyote-reared while the other group had high levels of human socialization during early ontogenetic development because they were hand-reared until 12 weeks of age. We tested 12 coyotes (n = 5 hand-reared, n = 7 coyote-reared) on responses to a human distal-pointing gesture across 10 trials each. Only one coyote, a hand-reared male, performed better than expected by chance and made correct choices in eight trials (incorrect choices in trials three and four). We found no difference between coyote- or hand-reared coyotes in their abilities to respond correctly to a human distal-pointing gesture (t = – 0.043, P = 0.97). Performance did not improve over time among all coyotes or within either group. The preliminary results from this study suggest that most coyotes will not respond to human gestures and early life experience does not appear to improve adult performance. These findings are in contrast to most studies of gesture studies of canids.

KEY WORDS:

• Canis latrans
• domestication
• social cognition
• task performance

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank M. Salesse and P. Ryan for assistance with field work. S. Brummer, J. Schultz, and other NWRC staff aided with research logistics and captive care. The findings and conclusions in this publication have not been formally disseminated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and should not be construed to represent any agency determination or policy.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

ETHICAL STANDARD

All applicable institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed, in accordance with the ethical standards of the NWRC and approved by its Institute for Animal Care and Use Committee (QA-2739).

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION

N. Floyd conceived of the study, collected and coded data, wrote the first draft of the manuscript, and analyzed data. J.K. Young helped design the study, assisted with data analyses, and contributed to writing the manuscript. Both authors commented on previous versions and read and approved the final manuscript.

SUPPLEMENTAL DATA

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/03949370.2020.1837966.

DATA ACCESSIBILITY

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included as a supplementary information file.

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by the intramural research program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC).