Cited by 5Wildlife Ecology and ConservationHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesRangeland and Wildlife Management

Interface of Human/Wildlife Interactions: An Example of a Bold Coyote (Canis latrans) in Atlanta, GA, USA

Open access
Mowry, Christopher B., Wilson, Lawrence A., vonHoldt, Bridgett M.·2021·Diversity

Abstract

There is arguably no other North American species that better illustrates the complexities of the human-wildlife interface than the coyote. In this study, a melanistic coyote in metropolitan Atlanta, Georgia was exhibiting unusually bold behaviors that included encounters with humans, domestic dogs, and attempts to enter homes. After tracking this coyote (nicknamed Carmine) across a highly urbanized landscape with participatory science, including at least 80 publicly reported sightings, he was captured and relocated to a wildlife sanctuary. Genome-wide analyses revealed 92.8% coyote ancestry, 1.7% gray wolf ancestry, and 5.5% domestic dog ancestry. The dog alleles in Carmine’s genome were estimated to have been acquired by his ancestors 14–29 years ago. Despite his bold behavior, Carmine did not carry any mutations known to shape hypersociability in canines. He did, however, carry a single copy of the dominant mutation responsible for his melanistic coat color. This detailed study of Carmine dispels common assumptions about the reticent coyote personality and the origins of behavior. His unusual bold behavior created a higher level of human-coyote interaction. He now serves as a public ambassador for human-wildlife coexistence, urging the global community to reconsider mythologies about wildlife and promote coexistence with them in landscapes significantly altered by human activity in our rapidly changing world.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/d13080372

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Scientists found that 6% of Carmine's genome showed domestic dog ancestry, which may have had some influence on his behavior and coloration.

    “Scientists found that 6% of Carmine's genome showed domestic dog ancestry, which may have had some influence on his behavior and coloration (Monzón et al., 2014;Mowry et al., 2021).”

    From Of Rarity and Symbolism: Understanding Human Perceptions of Charismatic Color Morphs (2024) · cites this paper as Mowry et al., 2021

    Section 3.2 (page unavailable) estimates Carmine’s domestic-dog ancestry at 5.5%, reasonably rounded to 6%. Section 3.3 (page unavailable) identifies a deletion associated with melanism but reports that Carmine lacked the tested canine hypersociability variants. The paper therefore does not establish that his dog ancestry influenced his behavior, or directly link that ancestry to his coloration. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 70 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Akey, J.M.; Ruhe, A.L.; Akey, D.T.; Wong, A.K.; Connelly, C.F.; Madeoy, J.; Nicholas, T.J.; Neff, M.W. Tracking Footprints of Artificial Selection in the Dog Genome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 1160-1165. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  2. Driscoll, C.A.; Macdonald, D.W.; O'Brien, S.J. From Wild Animals to Domestic Pets, an Evolutionary View of Domestication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 9971-9978. [CrossRef] · DOI · Paper page
  3. Hill, E.P.; Sumner, P.W.; Wooding, J.B. Human Influences on Range Expansion of Coyotes in the Southeast. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 1987, 15, 521-524.
  4. Pritchard, J.K.; Stephens, M.; Donnelly, P. Inference of Population Structure Using Multilocus Genotype Data. Genetics 2000, 155, 945. [CrossRef] [PubMed] · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mowry, C. B., Wilson, L. A., & vonHoldt, B. M.
Affiliations
  • Berry College (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
Corresponding author
Mowry, Christopher B.
Venue
Diversity
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-08-11
Volume
13
Issue
8
Pages
372
ISSN
1424-2818 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3189802439
Cited by
5
References
70
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
0.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diversity (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Berry College (N/A)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
Keywords
coyote, human-wildlife interface, melanism, urban coyotes, citizen science, wildlife translocation, human-wildlife coexistence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review