<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AAB</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title>Archives Animal Breeding</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AAB</abbrev-journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Arch. Anim. Breed.</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">2363-9822</issn>
<publisher><publisher-name>FBN Dummerstorf</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/aab-43-387-2000</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title>Vocalization of European wolves (&lt;i&gt;Canis lupus lupus&lt;/i&gt; L.) and various dog breeds (&lt;i&gt;Canis lupus&lt;/i&gt; f. fam.)</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Feddersen-Petersen</surname>
<given-names>D. U.</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
</contrib>
</contrib-group><aff id="aff1">
<label>1</label>
<addr-line>Institut für Haustierkunde, Christian-Albrechts-University, Olshausenstr. 40, 24118 Kiel, Germany</addr-line>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>10</day>
<month>10</month>
<year>2000</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>43</volume>
<issue>4</issue>
<fpage>387</fpage>
<lpage>398</lpage>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright: &#x000a9; 2000 D. U. Feddersen-Petersen</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2000</copyright-year>
<license license-type="open-access">
<license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"  xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</ext-link></license-p>
</license>
</permissions>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/43/387/2000/aab-43-387-2000.html">This article is available from https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/43/387/2000/aab-43-387-2000.html</self-uri>
<self-uri xlink:href="https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/43/387/2000/aab-43-387-2000.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://aab.copernicus.org/articles/43/387/2000/aab-43-387-2000.pdf</self-uri>
<abstract>
<p>Barking in domestic dogs still remains a topic of controversial discussions. While some authors assess dogbarking
an acoustic means of expression becoming more and more sophisticated during domestication, others
name this sound type &quot;non-communicative&quot;. Vocal repertoires as works on individual sound types are rare,
however, and there has been almost no work done on Iow-intensity, close-range vocalizations, yet such types of
vocalization are especially important with the more social canids, hence, with the human-dog-communication
and understanding of dogs. Most of the investigations published so far are based on auditive sound impressions
and lack objectivity. The principal method used in this study was sonagraphic. This facilitates the identiftcation
of sounds and reveales, whether subjective Classification can be verified by objectively measured parameters.
Finally, meanings, funetions and emotions were examined for all the major sounds described and are discussed in
terms of relationships between sound structure and Signal function, signal emission and social context as
behavioural response, and overlapping Channels of communication. Ontogeny of acoustic communication in 11
European wolves has been compared to various dog breeds (8 Standard Poodles, 8 Toy Poodles, 15 Kleine
Münsterländer, 11 Weimaraner Hunting Dogs, 16 Tervueren, 12 American Staffordshire Terriers, and 13
German Shepherds, 12 Alaskan Malamutes, and 9 Bull Terriers) from birth up to 8 (12) weeks resp. 4 (12)
months of age. Noisy and harmonic sound groups were analysed separately as overriding units. Following
parameters were used: fmax=maximum of spectrographic pietured sounds (Hz), xfo=mean of the lowest
frequency band of harmonic sounds (Hz), xfd = mean of the frequency of strongest amplitude of noisy sounds
(Hz), delta f = frequency range of sounds (Hz), duration of sounds (ms). Statistical analysis was run on
&quot;Statistica&quot;, Release 4,0. Within the sound type barking 2 to 12 subunits were classified in the different breeds,
aecording to their context-speeifie spectrographic design, and behavioural responses. Categories of function /
emotion include f.e. social play, play soliticing, exploration, caregiving, social contact and &quot;greeting&quot;, loneliness,
and agonistc behaviours. &quot;Interaction&quot; was the most common category of social context for masted barkings
(56% of oecurences). Especially close-range vocalizations, conceming the major sound type of most domestic
dogs, the bark, evolved highly variable. However, the ecological niche of domestic dogs is highly variable, just
as the individual differences in the dogs are, which seem to be breed-typical to a great extent. Thus, complexity
within the dog&apos;s vocal repertoire, and therefore enhancement of its communicative value, is achieved by many
subunits of bark, some standing for specific motivations, informations and expressions. Complexity within the
dogs&apos;vocal repertoire is extended by the use of mixed sounds in the barking context. Transitions and gradations
to a great extend oeeur via bark sounds: harmonic, intermediate and noisy subunits.</p>
</abstract>
<counts><page-count count="12"/></counts>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body/>
<back>
</back>
</article>