Detection dogs in nature conservation: a database on their worldwide deployment with a review on breeds used and their performance compared to other methods

Over the last century, dogs have been increasingly used to detect rare and elusive species or traces of them. The use of wildlife detection dogs (WDD) is particularly well established in North America, Europe and Oceania, and projects deploying them have increased worldwide. However, if they are to make a significant contribution to conservation and management, their strengths, abilities, and limitations should be fully identified. We reviewed the use of WDD with particular focus on the breeds used in different countries and for various targets, as well as their overall performance compared to other methods, by developing and analysing a database of 1220 publications, including 916 scientific ones, covering 2464 individual cases - most of them (1840) scientific. With the worldwide increase in the use of WDD, associated tasks have changed and become much more diverse. Since 1930, reports exist for 62 countries and 407 animal, 42 plant, 26 fungi and 6 bacteria species. Altogether, 108 FCI-classified and 20 non-FCI-classified breeds have worked as WDD. While certain breeds have been preferred on different continents and for specific tasks and targets, they were not generally better suited for detection tasks than others. Overall, WDD usually worked more effectively than other monitoring methods. For each species group, regardless of breed, detection dogs were better than other methods in 88.71% of all cases and only worse in 0.98%. It was only for arthropods that Pinshers and Schnauzers performed worse than other breeds. For mono- and dicotyledons, detection dogs did less often outperform other methods. Although every breed can be trained as a WDD, choosing the most suitable dog for the task and target may speed up training and increase the chance of success. Albeit selection of the most appropriate WDD is important, excellent training, knowledge about the target density and suitability, and a proper study design all appeared to have the highest impact on performance. Moreover, an appropriate area, habitat and weather are crucial for detection dog work. When these factors are taken into consideration, WDD can be an outstanding monitoring method.

近一个世纪以来，犬类愈发广泛地被用于侦测珍稀隐匿物种及其痕迹。野生动物侦测犬（Wildlife Detection Dogs, WDD）的应用在北美、欧洲与大洋洲已相当成熟，全球范围内部署此类犬只的项目也逐年增多。然而，若要让这类犬只为物种保护与管理工作作出实质性贡献，就必须全面厘清其优势、能力与局限性。本研究通过构建并分析涵盖1220篇文献（其中916篇为学术期刊文献）的数据库，对野生动物侦测犬的应用情况展开综述，重点关注不同国家所使用的犬种、针对的各类侦测目标，以及相较于其他监测方法的整体表现；该数据库共覆盖2464个独立案例，其中绝大多数（1840个）为学术案例。随着全球范围内野生动物侦测犬应用的普及，相关侦测任务也发生了变化，变得愈发多元。自1930年以来，相关研究报告已覆盖62个国家，涉及407种动物、42种植物、26种真菌以及6种细菌。总计有108个经国际犬业联盟（Fédération Cynologique Internationale, FCI）认证的犬种，以及20个未获其认证的犬种，曾被用作野生动物侦测犬。尽管不同大陆、针对特定任务与目标时，会偏好使用某些特定犬种，但整体而言，并无证据表明某类犬种相较于其他犬种更适配侦测工作。总体而言，野生动物侦测犬的侦测效率通常高于其他监测手段。就各物种类群而言，无论使用何种犬种，野生动物侦测犬在88.71%的案例中表现优于其他监测方法，仅在0.98%的案例中表现不及后者。仅在节肢动物类群的侦测中，平犬类（Pinshers）与雪纳瑞犬（Schnauzers）的表现弱于其他犬种。而在单子叶与双子叶植物类群中，野生动物侦测犬优于其他监测方法的比例相对更低。尽管所有犬种均可被训练为野生动物侦测犬，但为特定任务与目标挑选适配性最强的犬种，能够缩短训练周期并提升任务成功概率。尽管挑选适配性最优的野生动物侦测犬至关重要，但优质的训练方案、对目标物种密度与适配性的了解，以及合理的研究设计，似乎对侦测表现的影响最为显著。此外，适宜的作业区域、栖息地环境与天气条件，对野生动物侦测犬的工作开展同样至关重要。若能充分考量上述各类因素，野生动物侦测犬便可成为极为出色的物种监测手段。