Adaptations of the African Wild dog.

The African wild dogs camouflage and physical features well adapt it to its environment. These adaptations include; 1) Speedy pursuit. The African wild dogs have got long legs and large lungs which enable them to run long distances without tiring. Their speed as well the endurance and the pack structure make them most successful predators. They are successful 70-90% most of the times. 2) Group hunting Wild dogs cannot bring down large animals alone since they lack big powerful jaws. They therefore hunt in a pack (cooperation) which enables them to bring down animals five times larger than they. 3) Mottled coloring. The color of their skins which is different patterns aids in hunting by making the pack to appear large than it actually is. 4) Possession of big ears. African wild dogs have got large round ears which help them to have excellent hearing for hunting the prey as well as to detect their predators and therefore escape in time. Endangerment of the African Wild dog. The African wild dog is endangered in the following ways; a) The African wild dogs are still perceived as a problem animal in ranging areas and thus as a result, the African wild dogs are still being shot, hit by cars or snared. With respect to snaring, the problem for this species is further compounded by the fact that in some regions, these dogs are killed for muti (traditional medicine), with den sites being snared and the greater proportion of the targeted pack being eliminated. b) Diseases such as rabies which culminated the local extinction in the Mara ecosystem. Distemper which is suspected to be responsible for the disappearance of some packs in the Maasai Mara. Other diseases

include; anthrax, babesiosis, canine ehrchosis and many others. However, African wild dogs are not vectors of disease but rather victims of it. c) Habitat loss due to increasing human habitation. Large tracks of land have been taken over for cultivation and livestock grazing. As more people are colonizing the land, wild dogs have been persecuted and their prey has been depleted. Worse still, wild dogs were being persecuted in the national parks and game reserves which represented some of the best remaining habitats. d) Handling stress from the researchers may have caused some of the extinctions of the African wild dogs. For instance, from research (19651991) in the serengeti-mara ecosystem, it is suggested that small populations of endangered species may be driven to extinction by the very researchers whose concern is to keep the animals alive. Based on these data (Burrow 1992, Burrow et al 1994 and 1995). It was concluded that the most likely explanation for the extinctions of the study packs by mid 1991 is that intervention-induced stress following the introduction in 1985 of the routine invasive research involving field techniques such as trapping, darting, tagging, and radio-collaring and tissue sampling collectively known as handling. Story of population decline of the African Wild dog. Between 1985-1991, the entire Wild dog study population comprising of 14 packs containing approximately 200 members disappeared from Mara ecosystem in Kenya. All these packs were subject to the conservation research by scientists who routinely used invasive methods. In the Mara population study from 1987 onwards, sporadic experimental rabies vaccination was carried out despite the lack of any serological evidence at that time that the packs in Mara have been exposed to rubies virus. In 1990, a mass vaccination was carried out on the nearby Serengeti study population in Tanzania which had been exposed to rabies virus pre vaccination naturally. 77% survived less than four months after the anesthetization and radio collaring of one or more individuals in the pack. Rubies were therefore confirmed the most probable cause of unvaccinated and the vaccinated pack in the Mara-Serengeti ecosystem. The Mara ecosystem (175 km) form part of a breeding population of at least 200 individuals with interchange between widely spaced packs via long

range dispersal often greater than 100km of yearling. According to the population viability program, it suggests that large (greater than 100km) wild dog populations occupying large (>= 5000km sq) areas are unlikely to become extinct due to a chance event such as disease outbreak. Prior to 1986, no pack extinction in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem was known other than those shot by game wardens or rangers as vermin, a practice which fortunately ceased in 1973. In 1986, the first disease related pack extinction in the ecosystem occurred within three months of the anesthetization and radio collaring. The rate of spread of the disease in Serengeti-Mara ecosystem increased paralleling the increasing use of routine intensive invasive research techniques post 1985. There was therefore an extinction of packs in 1986, 1988, 1989 and 1990-92. The pack population was expanding with new packs replacing those lost as a result from good reproductive success of remaining packs and arrival of immigrant groups of both sexes. However, stressors from monthly and more frequent aerial monitor between 1986-90 and presence of tourist vehicles following hunting packs and exposer to variety of pathogens including a new virus canid parvovirus. In September to October 1990, more than 80% of the study population was vaccinated against rabies. All died with empty radio-collars being found from some individuals of the pack and the rest simply disappeared by June 1991. However, in this ecosystem, unhandled packs were still present after all the study packs had died. These are persisting up to date. It was concluded that the most likely explanation for the demise of the study packs by mid 1991 was due to intervention-stress following the introduction in 1985 of routine invasive research involving field techniques such as trapping, darting, tagging, radio-collaring and tissue sampling collectively known as handling as stated earlier in the reasons of endangerment of the African wild dog. Since 2000, wild dogs have started to reappear across the entire region (Mara-Serengeti ecosystem). The reason behind the reappearance is unknown with the suggestions being the decrease in Lion or Hyena numbers however with no data to support this conjecture.(Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute).

Why rabies emerged a problem in the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem post 1985? Some free living packs exposed to rabies virus and with some seropositive individuals died after vaccination against rabies. A suggestion to this is that if asymptomatic wild dog carrier of rabies in which the virus for rubies is latent is handled, the stress induces rapid rise of corticosteroid hormone level which results in immunosuppression allowing activation of the virus leading to the clinical rabies and pack death. Another explanation suggestion is that handling stress induced immunosupression (especially following the Serengeti-mara ecosystem mass vaccination against rabies) led to greater susceptibility of some stress immunosupressed individuals to rabies virus ( or any other pathogen ) in the environment especially when the pathogen is next encountered.

Response of the IUCN Canid Specialist Group (CSG) to pack extinction in the Serengeti-mara ecosystem Initially the extinction was questioned by the IUCN Canid Specialist Group (CSG) claiming that despite the retrieval of the radio-collars and some skeletal material did not prove high mortality and that failure to locate packs was probably due to the lack of monitoring and some emigration. In 1992, CSG claimed that as the Serengeti-mara ecosystem packs had been vaccinated against rabies virus, they probably did not die of rabies but rather other pathogen such as Canine Distemper may have been involved. Though there is no serological evidence of exposure of any wild dog in the ecosystem to this pathogen. Claim by MC Nutt & Boggs 1996 in their book that in 1990 the Tanzanian and Kenya study packs were decimated by rubies is correct. However the claim by the same authors in 1991 when the rest of the study population died that, .evidence indicated that a canine distemper virus, originating from domestic dog population in the area, was responsible for the for the second and final demise is untrue and incorrect as there is no such evidence.

In 1992, CSG proposed an immediate moratorium and handling of wild dogs in the Serengeti-mara ecosystem and initiated an analysis of data ( to be carried out by Dr.J.Ginsberg ) from other handled study populations. Data from the Mara was crucial as this was the only other open Lycaon population, all the study groups remaining in Africa being in woodlands; and the only other population with high disease related mortality and crucially in which free living packs had been exposed to, vaccinated and died from rabies (East 1996) However, possible adverse effects of the first experimental vaccination of free living wild dogs in Africa which began in the Mara 1987 were not considered by the CSG in their data analysis. Dart vaccination was not considered a form of handling and individuals so treated; at least 16 individuals including all 9 in one of the three study packs were included in CSGs analysis in the unhandled category. It was accepted that rabies was the cause of extinction of the African wild dogs form the Serengeti-mara ecosystem by 1997 when the death of all study population was finally acknowledged by the CSG and agreed that it resulted from the canid strain of rabies virus identified in the Serengeti-mara ecosystem. Since 2000, wild dogs have started to reappear across the entire region (Mara-Serengeti ecosystem). The reason behind the reappearance is unknown with the suggestions being the decrease in Lion or Hyena numbers however with no data to support this conjecture.(Tanzania Wildlife Research Institute). The African wild dog conservancy has a community conservation project in northeastern and coastal Kenya, a biodiversity rich mosaic protected areas and community lands under extreme threat. This region is potentially a significant refuge for African wild dogs and an important corridor for the meta population of the horn of Africa as well as other threatened wildlife species. It is a wild dog priority by the IUCN/CSG canid specialist group and the AZA/ wild dog species survival program. (SSP). In Kenya the study area is located in the Ijara and Lamu districts of the northeastern and coast provinces respectively. The study area consists of community land and small national reserves and lies within two biodiversity hotspots; the coastal forest of eastern Africa and the horn of Africa (tana area) also included. The pioneering project investigates the conservation status, ecology and effects of cultural believes, traditional practices and human activities on the African wild dogs in this region. A key component in

sustaining wildlife and promoting a healthy environment is to empower local communities through hand training and help community based organizations establish education programs. Restoration and conservation of the African wild dog The conservation of many fragmented small populations of the African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) relies on understanding the natural processes affecting genetic diversity, demographics and future viability. Test for inbreeding avoidance via mate selection and model for potential selection and model for potential consequences of avoidance on population persistence show that wild dogs avoid mating with kins. Inbreeding is rare in packs. From computer simulations, inbreeding has 1.6% probability of extinction within 100 years whereas all populations avoiding incestuous matings become extinct due to the absence of unrelated mates. Populations that avoid mating with first order relatives become extinct after 63 years compared with the persistence of 37 and 19 years for those prevented from second order and third order mating respectively. Although stronger inbreeding avoidance maintains significantly more genetic variation, results from research demonstrate the potentially severe demographic impacts of reduced numbers of suitable mates on the future viability of the small, isolated African wild dog populations. The rapid rate of population decline suggests that extinction may occur before inbreeding depression is observed. Therefore, short term effects of inbreeding in African wild dogs are; i) Decreased heterozygosity ii) Expression of deleterious alleles. iii) Reduced fitness due to the inbreeding depression in variety of species drawing them into an extinction vortex. Long term consequence is the reduced ability to adapt to the changing environment and thus increase the risk of extinction.

Therefore the natural selection should favor behavioral mechanism for animals to avoid mating with the kin. Inbreeding avoidance is thus associated with three recognized behavioral strategies. These are; a) Natal dispersal which reduces contact among relatives. b) Female seek extra pair mating to enhance the genetic diversity of the progeny. c) Individuals avoid mating with relatives through three types of kin recognition. i) Familiarity. ii) Major histocompatibility complex comparisons. iii) Phenotype matching where an individual compares templates of close kin or itself to determine the relatedness to unknown individuals. This inbreeding limits the number of mates available for reproduction in small populations such as those of the African wild dog. Wild dogs are cooperative breeders living in highly social groups with mature offspring often remaining in the natal pack to help to raise pups for 1-3 years before dispersal. The primary factor generally believed to regulate reproductive success ( and breeding avoidance) is behavioral dominance displayed by the alpha male and female who in turn, behaviorally and or physiologically suppress reproduction remaining pack members. If dominance prevents offspring from breeding in the natal pack, then at least three outcomes would be common; a) When sire or dam dies or disappears, an offspring would breed with the opposite sex parent. b) Siblings would breed together after dispersal from the natal pack. c) Offspring siblings and adults unrelated to the unrelated to the alpha pair should be equally suppressed from reproducing in the pack. To conserve the African wild dog, there should be an examination of the possibility that the African wild dog to avoid inbreeding through selective mating and to explore the persistence of the species, given its dire status, naturally low densities and often small in population size.

Results from research in integrated behavioral evidence, genetic and demographic evaluation support that inbreeding avoidance is present in the African wild dogs and suggests that individuals within this species have the capacity to discriminate between kin and non kin through recognition by association. These animals most likely learn this during rearing to recognize familiar individuals. Therefore if the African wild dogs are given enough resources (habitat and prey) and stop persecutions, they will be able to sustain robust genetic diversity. But given the current dire status of the wild dog coupled with high levels of persecution and adult mortality, inbreeding avoidance will further compromise the conservation status of this endangered species. Inbreeding avoidance is an important factor in considering the conservation management of small and isolated groups of wild dogs while maintaining and linking prey-filled protected areas is essential for the long term viability of the population. It appears imperative to continue translocation of African wild dogs between the populations isolates (in-situ) to mimic natural immigration and to mitigate this species mechanisms involving inbreeding avoidance.