Biology subjects

Marshall-Pescini, S.

Publications and source records attributed to Marshall-Pescini, S..

4 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2026

From wag to affect: Tail kinematic signatures of canine emotional states in computer-controlled environments

From facial expressions to gestures, animals use multiple signal modalities to express emotions and communicate. In dogs, tail movements are conspicuous behaviours associated with emotional states, but this link remains debated. We investigated canine emotional states underlying tail wagging by systematically analysing differences in tail movements in a computer-controlled task encompassing two non-social Conditions - Rewarded (positive) and Unrewarded (negative), and two Epochs (pre-response and outcome anticipation). Using pose-tracking we found that 11 out of 23 dogs did not wag their tails in at least 75% of trials, suggesting that some dogs may inherently wag less or that tail wagging is primarily a social signal. Our results showed that dogs were more likely to wag during positive anticipation; whereas in the negative condition, despite tail amplitude being more prominent, increased speeds reflected arousal rather than valence. Further work should assess tail kinematics in social contexts to test and extend these findings.

animal behavior and cognition↗

bioRxiv2026

Good dog, bad wolf: Debunking evolutionary preparedness to fear wolves

The return of wolves to historical ranges often causes strong opposition, contrasting with widespread affection for domestic dogs. Evolutionary accounts suggest this discrepancy stems from deeply ingrained affective responses that predispose humans to fear wolves while fostering positive attachment to dogs. Using neuroimaging and self-report data from 42 participants, we investigated how defensive neural circuits linked to implicit threat detection are related to explicit threat evaluations of the two species. During functional MRI, participants viewed images of wolves, dogs, and snakes - the latter chosen for their strong engagement of predisposed threat-related responses - displaying either aggressive or non-aggressive behaviours. As predicted, aggressive displays of all species elicited stronger neural responses in threat-related brain areas. Snakes elicited stronger subcortical threat responses than wolves or dogs, while neural responses to wolves and dogs were largely indistinguishable when comparing aggressive displays. However, explicit threat evaluations strongly differed: wolves were perceived and rated as significantly more threatening than dogs, especially when the species exhibited aggressive displays. Together, these findings challenge accounts that humans are predisposed for negative responses to wolves, suggesting instead that our attitudes towards the species are shaped primarily by deliberate-evaluative processes rather than by implicit-automatic threat responses. This underscores the role of experience, knowledge, stereotypes, and socio-cultural mechanisms in shaping public perceptions of human-wildlife conflicts and conservation efforts. These results provide new insights into the cognitive and affective foundations of human-animal relationships, informing efforts to improve human-wildlife coexistence. Significance statementWhy are wolves feared while dogs are loved? One common explanation is that humans are evolutionarily predisposed to fear wolves as dangerous predators, while dogs, due to domestication, occupy a special niche in human lives. By comparing neural and behavioural responses to wolves, dogs and snakes, we show that wolves do not evoke stronger threat-related brain responses than dogs, despite being judged as the greater threat. However, wolves and dogs alike engage cortical systems associated with perception and evaluation, suggesting that cultural narratives and explicit reasoning, rather than hardwired automatic fear, underlie wolf aversion. These findings challenge evolutionary accounts of fear preparedness and suggest that negative attitudes towards wolves can be addressed through education, communication, and public engagement.

neuroscience↗

bioRxiv2025

Neophilia in wolves and dogs

The study of domestication provides a unique opportunity to analyze the effects of natural selection in the attraction towards novelty --known as neophilia. This is chiefly due to the fact that selective pressures acting on domesticated animals are often greatly diminished or at least very different from their wild counterparts. In this study, we investigated the neophilic levels of three canine populations differing in their level of contact with human environments both from an evolutionary and ontogenetic perspective: wolves, pack-living dogs, and pet dogs. In order to study their neophilic response, we presented the animals with two objects. The first of these objects was displayed in the animals enclosure for several days. After the animals were habituated to this first object, the second one was introduced together with the first one in a shorter test session meant to explore their preferences for either of the objects. We predicted that dogs --and pet dogs in particular to display higher levels of neophilia, since human-created environments tend to change at a faster pace, and thus, a higher drive to explore these changes would be more beneficial than in a comparably more stable environment. Our results show no apparent differences between the populations in terms of latency to approach the new object, nor in the identity of the object they approached first. Nonetheless, all populations interacted more with the new object during the test phase. Wolves did also interact longer with the object presented in the first phase of the experiment.

animal behavior and cognition↗

bioRxiv2024

Inference in wolves and dogs: The "cups task", revisited

Inferential reasoning --the process of arriving at a conclusion from a series of premises-- has been studied in a multitude of animal species through the use of the "cups task" paradigm. In one of the versions of this set-up, two opaque cups --one baited, one empty-- are shaken in front of the animal. As only the baited cup makes a noise when shaken, the animals can locate the reward by inferring that only a baited cup would make noise, that an empty cup would make no noise, or both. In a previous iteration of this paradigm in wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris), wolves seemed to outperform dogs. However, due to the lack of control conditions, it was not possible to assess each species inference capabilities, nor how they related to each other. The current study adds several conditions in which the baited cup, the empty cup, or no cups are shaken, in order to tackle this issue. Our results seem to indicate that wolves and dogs made their choices not based on inference but on the saliency and order of the stimuli presented, something that seems in line with the previous study. We discuss the potential causes behind the animals performance, as well as proposing alternative paradigms that may be more apt to measure inference abilities in wolves and dogs.

animal behavior and cognition↗