|
|
Keiper, R. R. (1986). Social structure. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract, 2(3), 465–484.
Abstract: Socially feral horses live in stable social groups characterized by one adult male, a number of adult females, and their offspring up to 2 years of age. Extra males either live by themselves or with other males in bachelor groups. The bands occupy nondefended home ranges that often overlap. Many abnormal behaviors seen in domestic horses occur because some aspect of their normal social behavior cannot be carried out in captivity.
|
|
|
|
Houpt, K. A., & Wolski, T. R. (1980). Stability of equine hierarchies and the prevention of dominance related aggression. Equine Vet J, 12(1), 15–18.
Abstract: The dominance hierarchy of a herd of 10 Thoroughbred mares was determined twice, at an interval of 18 months, using paired feeding tests. Each mare's rank was correlated significantly between the 2 tests. This indicated that the hierarchy within the herd was stable. The offspring of dominant and subordinate mares were also tested for dominance in their own age groups. The offspring of dominant mares tended to be near the top of the hierarchy while those of middle and low ranking mares were not consistently found in the middle or bottom of their own hierarchies. Paired feeding tests were carried out on 8 ponies. During tests the time that each pony spent eating and the ponies' aggressive interactions were recorded. Two situations were used. Each pony-pair was tested when both ponies were in the same paddock and also when they were separated by a rail fence. The subordinate ponies spent significantly more time eating and the domonant pony was significantly less aggressive, when the pony-pair was separated by a fence than when they were in one paddock. It was concluded that the dominance hierarchies of adult horse groups changed very little over time and that the foals of dominant mares will tend to be dominant in their own age groups. Management practices can be used to reduce aggression and consequent injury that may arise in group feeding situations.
|
|
|
|
Noë, R., de Waal, F. B., & van Hooff, J. A. (1980). Types of dominance in a chimpanzee colony. Folia Primatol (Basel), 34(1-2), 90–110.
Abstract: This study examines to what extent the concept of dominance can be used to describe the social structure of a group of semi-free-living chimpanzees. 15 behavioural variables, based on agonistic, competitive and affinitive behaviour patterns, have been compared with respect to the interindividual directions in which they occurred. In this analysis use was made of indices that reflect the position an individual occupies in the relationship structure. These indices were calculated per individual for all variables and subjected to factor analysis and cluster analysis. As a result, 13 of the variables could be grouped in three categories which have been labelled: (1) agonistic dominance; (2) bluff dominance, and (3) competitive dominance. Whereas the top positions in the hierarchies based on the first two closely related types of dominance were occupied by the adult males, the hierarchy based on the third type was headed by several adult females.
|
|
|
|
Hogue, M. - E., Beaugrand, J. P., & Lague, P. C. (1996). Coherent use of information by hens observing their former dominant defeating or being defeated by a stranger. Behav. Process., 38(3), 241–252.
Abstract: This study examines the role of observation during the formation of triads in female domestic hens. Results indicate that during hierarchy formation, a hen observing agonistic interactions and conflict settlement between its former dominant and a stranger uses this information when in turn confronted by the latter. Under a first condition (E, N = 15 triads), bystanders witnessed their prior dominant being defeated by a stranger before being introduced to them. In a second condition (C1, N = 16 triads), bystanders witnessed the victory of their prior dominant over a stranger. In a third condition (C2, N = 15 triads), bystanders witnessed two strangers establishing a dominance relationship before being introduced to their prior dominant and to a stranger the former had just defeated. The behavioural strategies of bystanders depended on the issue of the conflict they had witnessed. Bystanders of the E condition behaved as having no chance of defeating the stranger. They never initiated an attack against it, and upon being attacked, readily submitted in turn to the stranger. On the contrary, bystanders of the C1 condition behaved as having some chances against the stranger. They initiated attacks in 50% of cases, and won 50% of conflicts against the stranger. Under condition C2, bystanders first initiated contact with the strangers in only 27% of cases, which approximates the average of their chances for defeating the stranger. However, bystanders finally defeated the strangers in 40% of cases. These results suggest that bystanders of conditions E and C1 gained some information on the relationship existing between their prior dominant and the stranger and that they used it coherently, perhaps through transitive inference, thus contributing to the existence of transitive relationships within the triads. Alternate explanations are examined.
|
|
|
|
Wittemyer, G., & Getz, W. M. (2006). A likely ranking interpolation for resolving dominance orders in systems with unknown relationships. Behaviour, 143(7), 909–930.
Abstract: n many animal systems agonistic interactions may be rare or not overt, particularly where such interactions are costly or of high risk as is common for large mammals. We present a technique developed specifically for resolving an optimized dominance order of individuals in systems with transitive (i.e. linear) dominance relationships, but where not all relationships are known. Our method augments the widely used I&SI method (de Vries, 1998) with an interpolation function for resolving the relative ranks of individuals with unknown relationships. Our method offers several advantages over other dominance methods by enabling the incorporation of any proportion of unknown relationships, resolving a unique solution to any dominance matrix, and calculating cardinal dominance strengths for each individual. As such, this method enables novel insight into difficult to study behavioural systems.
|
|
|
|
Lehmann, K., Kallweit, E., & Ellendorff, F. (2006). Social hierarchy in exercised and untrained group-housed horses--A brief report. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 96(3-4), 343–347.
Abstract: Changes in social hierarchy were evaluated in a herd of 3-year-old Hanoverian geldings. One group (n = 5) was exposed to a training programme, the other (n = 5) remained untrained. After 6 months, the groups were reversed. Hierarchical positions were evaluated by field observations and/or paired-feeding tests at the beginning, the middle, the end of the first and at the end of the second training period. Both methods yielded identical results. Almost all horses changed position in only one direction: either up or down. Neither increase in aggression nor mutual injuries were recorded during the whole experiment. No statistically verified differences in dominance ranking occurred between trained and untrained groups, but apparent differences were consistent. Thus, if horses are kept in the same group for a longer period of time, exercise induced changes in hierarchy are probably of minor importance and are unlikely to increase the incidence of injuries. This may have implications for the promotion of group-housing for sport horses.
|
|
|
|
Dunbar, R. I., & Dunbar, E. P. (1976). Contrasts in social structure among black-and-white colobus monkey groups. Anim. Behav., 24(1), 84–92.
Abstract: Three types of Colobus guereza groups may be distinguished on the bases of size and composition, namely small one-male groups, large, one-male groups and multi-male groups. The social structure of each type of group is described in terms of the distribution of non-agonistic interactions, the frequency and distribution of agonistic behaviour and the organization of the roles of vigilance, territorial defence and leadership. A number of differences are found between the group types which appear to be related to the differences in group size and composition. It is suggested that these group types represent stages in the life-cycle of colobus groups, and that such an interpretation may help to resolve some of the conflicting reports in the literature.
|
|
|
|
Puppe, B., Langbein, J., Bauer, J., & Hoy, S. (2008). A comparative view on social hierarchy formation at different stages of pig production using sociometric measures. Livestock Science, 113(2-3), 155–162.
Abstract: A standardised and comprehensive approach to describe dominance relationships in gregarious farm animals quantitatively was recently developed, incorporating a combination of appropriate sociometric measures. The present study applied this approach to a comparative analysis of the social hierarchies within 57 groups of domestic pigs at different age/production stages with a total of 496 animals. Unacquainted pigs were grouped to three age categories which correspond to the typical production stages: weaned pigs (PIG28, 12 groups), growing pigs (PIG80, 16 groups), and reproductive sows (SOW, 29 groups). Based on observed agonistic interactions, sociometric values were calculated both at the dyadic and at the group level and may be considered as preliminary reference values for further studies. As indicated by the respective values of the Kendall index (PIG28: 0.66, tested as significant in 69.0% of the observed groups; PIG80: 0.71, 87.5%; SOW: 0.61, 69.0%), and the improved Landau index (PIG28: 0.70, 75.0%; PIG80: 0.72, 93.7%; SOW: 0.71, 72.4%), a social organisation towards a quasi-linear social hierarchy was predominantly developed throughout all age/production categories. However, compared to weaned and growing pigs, sows were characterised by significant differences concerning establishment (fewer agonistic interactions) and kind (more unknown dyads, fewer two-way and significant dyads, higher directional consistency index) of their social hierarchy. It seems that sows have effectively adapted their agonistic behaviour towards pen-mates to regulate social dominance relationships, whereas younger pigs frequently display agonistic interactions also to gain additional experience on social cues (e.g. the fighting ability of an opponent). Hence, it is concluded that the effective experience of socialisation during sensitive periods may increase the social skills of pigs which in turn can improve their welfare and health, e.g. by adjusted aggressive behaviour. The consideration of comparable and standardised sociometric measures in livestock breeding may help to improve husbandry conditions.
|
|
|
|
Langbein, J., & Puppe, B. (2004). Analysing dominance relationships by sociometric methods--a plea for a more standardised and precise approach in farm animals. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 87(3-4), 293–315.
Abstract: Social dominance is a multidimensional phenomenon occurring in all gregarious farm animals and finds its reflection in a dominance hierarchy. Hence, numerous studies have tried to analyse dominance relationships as well as to correlate outcoming results (mostly individual ranks) with other behavioural and/or physiological features of the animals. Although the concept of dominance, once established, has been developed continuously and several sociometric measures were cumulatively introduced, a consistent analysing approach has not been achieved, especially in farm animals. Thus, considerable inconsistencies in the used methodology may impair obtained results and interpretations. The present paper is a plea for a more standardised and complex approach when analysing dominance relationships, not only in farm animals. First, derived from a structural definition of dominance, we suggest in detail the preferably consistent use of appropriate sociometric measures at all social levels of analysis: the dyad as the starting level, the group as the highest level, and the individual as the basic level. Second, we applied this procedures in a case study to analyse social dominance in a group of dwarf goats (n=12) and pigs (n=10), respectively, to comparatively demonstrate benefits and problems of such an approach in two different farm animal species. It is concluded that the use of individual ranks is actually only reasonable when fundamental sociometric measures both at the dyadic level (e.g. percentage of dyads which have a significant asymmetric outcome) and at the group level (e.g. the strength of hierarchy) are successfully tested by statistical methods as also presented in this paper. The calculated sociometric measures deliver not only a more comprehensive “picture” of the social relationships within a group as simple ranks do, but also indicate possible reasons of differences in the behavioural development. For instance, whereas the dwarf goats maintained a quasi-linear dominance hierarchy over time with a high rate of overt agonistic behaviour, pigs after the establishment of their hierarchy showed a reduced agonistic behaviour which makes it questionable to calculate reliable sociometric measures. These species-dependent variations may be primarily caused by different kinds of the fighting behaviour in goats (i.e. ritualised, low costs) and pigs (i.e. more seriously, high costs). Overall, a more consistent and standardised approach of analysing social dominance in (farm) animals may improve the scientific value of single studies and makes it easier to compare various studies within a species and between species.
|
|
|
|
Vervaecke, H., Stevens, J., Vandemoortele, H., Sigurjönsdöttir, H., & De Vries, H. (2007). Aggression and dominance in matched groups of subadult Icelandic horses (Equus caballus). J. Ethol., 25(3), 239–248.
Abstract: Abstract We studied sex differences in the nature of aggression and dominance behaviour in two newly formed groups of 1-year-old Icelandic horses. One herd contained nine geldings, the other nine mares. The groups were matched with regard to dominance-determining traits such as age, weaning age, composition of native herd, social experience, genetic origin, body condition and maternal dominance status. High-ranking individuals of both sexes were more aggressive, high-ranking males were older, and high-ranking females had a better body condition. Frequencies of aggressions were similar in both groups. The mares reacted significantly more by showing submission upon an aggression rather than by not responding or by escalating the aggression. For the geldings, this difference was not observed due to a lower tendency to submit. A linear dominance hierarchy was found in both groups. David`s scores provided additional information regarding cardinal rank distances and were used to calculate steepness of hierarchies. The female hierarchy was somewhat steeper compared to the male hierarchy, suggesting somewhat lower despotism among males. This was mainly a consequence of the lower unidirectionality in male submission. Male contests occurred predominantly between dyads at top and mid positions, suggesting a low degree of acceptance of the hierarchy.
|
|
