Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May;4(2):106-114.
doi: 10.1002/vms3.92. Epub 2018 Jan 12.

The Paradox of Canine Conspecific Coprophagy

Affiliations
Free PMC article

The Paradox of Canine Conspecific Coprophagy

Benjamin L Hart et al. Vet Med Sci. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Canine conspecific coprophagy, the tendency or predisposition of some dogs to eat their own faeces or those of other dogs, seems paradoxical because dogs typically show an aversion to conspecific faeces. In an attempt to resolve this paradox, we set out to determine the factors associated with the occurrence of this behaviour and to evaluate the efficacy of 11 products marketed for treating coprophagy as well as behaviour modification procedures. Because a large sample of dogs was needed to address these issues, two web-based surveys were utilized. One, intended to compare coprophagic dogs and non-coprophagic dogs, yielded 1552 returns. The other, yielding 1475 usable returns, specifically recruited owners of coprophagic dogs to gather information about the characteristics of coprophagy and treatment success. The findings revealed that 16% of dogs sampled engaged in frequent conspecific coprophagy, defined as having been seen eating stools at least six times. No evidence was found relating the coprophagy to diet or the dog's age. Coprophagic dogs were as easily house trained as non-coprophagic dogs, suggesting a normal aversion to faeces. Coprophagic dogs were more likely to be reported as greedy eaters than non-coprophagic dogs. The reported success rate of the commercial products and behaviour modification approaches was close to zero, indicating that the behaviour is not readily changed. The coprophagy was overwhelmingly directed at fresh stools, defined as being no more than 2 days old. A hypothesis is offered that coprophagy reflects a tendency inherited from the ancestral wolf to keep the den area free of faecal-borne intestinal parasites that might be deposited in the den resting area and would typically have parasite ova that are not initially infective, but could develop infective larvae after 2 days. An evolved parasite defence strategy to consume fresh faeces in the rest area would be adaptive.

Keywords: canine; coprophagy; dogs; faeces eating; stool eating.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 2 articles

References

    1. Bowman D.D. (2014) Georgis’ Parasitology for Veterinarians. 10th edn Elsevier Saunders: St. Louis.
    1. Boze B. (2008) A comparison of common treatments for coprophagy in Canis familiaris. Journal of Applied Companion Animal 2, 22–28.
    1. Bynum D., van Ballenberghe V., Schlotthauer J.C. & Erickson A.W. (1977) Parasites of wolves, Canis lupus L., in northeastern Minnesota, as indicated by analysis of fecal samples. Canadian Journal of Zoology 55, 376–380. - PubMed
    1. Custer J.W. & Pencet D.B. (1981) Ecological analyses of helminth populations of wild canids from the gulf coastal prairies of Texas and Louisiana. Journal of Parasitology 67, 289–300.
    1. Gobar G.M. & Kass P.H. (2002) Worldwide web‐based survey of vaccination practices, postvaccinational reactions, and vaccine site‐associated sarcomas in cats. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 220, 1425–1576. - PubMed

Publication types

Feedback