Contact rates of wild-living and domestic dog populations in Australia: a new approach

Abstract

<p>Dogs (<i>Canis familiaris</i>) can transmit pathogens to other domestic animals, humans and wildlife. Both domestic and wild-living dogs are ubiquitous within mainland Australian landscapes, but their interactions are mostly unquantified. Consequently, the probability of pathogen transfer among wild-living and domestic dogs is unknown. To address this knowledge deficit, we established 65 camera trap stations, deployed for 26,151 camera trap nights, to quantify domestic and wild-living dog activity during 2 years across eight sites in north-east New South Wales, Australia. Wild-living dogs were detected on camera traps at all sites, and domestic dogs recorded at all but one. No contacts between domestic and wild-living dogs were recorded, and limited temporal overlap in activity was observed (32 %); domestic dogs were predominantly active during the day and wild-living dogs mainly during the night. Contact rates between wild-living and between domestic dogs, respectively, varied between sites and over time (range 0.003-0.56 contacts per camera trap night). Contact among wild-living dogs occurred mainly within social groupings, and peaked when young were present. However, pup emergence occurred throughout the year within and between sites and consequently, no overall annual cycle in contact rates could be established. Due to infrequent interactions between domestic and wild-living dogs, there are likely limited opportunities for pathogen transmission that require direct contact. In contrast, extensive spatial overlap of wild and domestic dogs could facilitate the spread of pathogens that do not require direct contact, some of which may be important zoonoses.</p>