|
|
Fricke, H. W. (1973). Individual partner recognition in fish: field studies on Amphiprion bicinctus. Naturwissenschaften, 60(4), 204–205.
|
|
|
|
Polyanskaya, A. I., & Ovchinnikov, V. V. (1974). Rate of growth and size of the brain of the horse mackerel. Sov J Ecol, 4(3), 256–257.
|
|
|
|
Dow, M., Ewing, A. W., & Sutherland, I. (1976). Studies on the behaviour of cyprinodont fish. III. The temporal patterning of aggression in Aphyosemion striatum (Boulenger). Behaviour, 59(3-4), 252–268.
|
|
|
|
Hazem, A. S. (1978). [Collective review: Salmonella paratyphi in animals and in the environment]. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr, 85(7), 296–303.
|
|
|
|
Levin, L. E., & Grillet, M. E. (1988). [Diversified leadership: a social solution of problems in schools of fish]. Acta Cient Venez, 39(2), 175–180.
|
|
|
|
Dugatkin, L. A., & Godin, G. J. (1992). Predator inspection, shoaling and foraging under predation hazard in the Trinidadian guppy,Poecilia reticulata. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 34(3), 265–276.
Abstract: Guppies,Poecilia reticulata, living in stream pools in Trinidad, West Indies, approached a potential fish predator (a cichlid fish model) in a tentative, saltatory manner, mainly as singletons or in pairs. Such behavior is referred to as predator inspection behavior. Inspectors approached the trunk and tail of the predator model more frequently, more closely and in larger groups than they approached the predator's head, which is presumably the most dangerous area around the predator. However, guppies were not observed in significantly larger shoals in the stream when the predator model was present. In a stream enclosure, guppies inspected the predator model more frequently when it was stationary compared to when it was moving, and made closer inspections to the posterior regions of the predator than to its head. Therefore, the guppies apparently regarded the predator model as a potential threat and modified their behavior accordingly when inspecting it. Guppies exhibited a lower feeding rate in the presence of the predator, suggesting a trade-off between foraging gains and safety against predation. Our results further suggest that predator inspection behavior may account for some of this reduction in foraging. These findings are discussed in the context of the benefits and costs of predator inspection behavior.
|
|
|
|
Dugatkin, L. A., & Mesterton-Gibbons, M. (1996). Cooperation among unrelated individuals: reciprocal altruism, by-product mutualism and group selection in fishes. Biosystems, 37(1-2), 19–30.
Abstract: Cooperation among unrelated individuals can evolve not only via reciprocal altruism but also via trait-group selection or by-product mutualism (or some combination of all three categories). Therefore the (iterated) prisoner's dilemma is an insufficient paradigm for studying the evolution of cooperation. We replace this game by the cooperator's dilemma, which is more versatile because it enables all three categories of cooperative behavior to be examined within the framework of a single theory. Controlled studies of cooperation among fish provide examples of each category of cooperation. Specifically, we describe reciprocal altruism among simultaneous hermaphrodites that swap egg parcels, group-selected cooperation among fish that inspect dangerous predators and by-product mutualism in the cooperative foraging of coral-reef fish.
|
|
|
|
Sovrano, V. A., Rainoldi, C., Bisazza, A., & Vallortigara, G. (1999). Roots of brain specializations: preferential left-eye use during mirror-image inspection in six species of teleost fish. Behav. Brain. Res., 106(1-2), 175–180.
Abstract: It has recently been reported that predator inspection is more likely to occur when a companion (i.e. the mirror image of the test animal) is visible on the left rather than on the right side of mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki. This very unexpected outcome could be consistent with the hypothesis of a preferential use of the right eye during sustained fixation of a predator as well as of a preferential use of the left eye during fixation of conspecifics. We measured the time spent in monocular viewing during inspection of their own mirror images in females of six species of fish, belonging to different families--G. holbrooki, Xenotoca eiseni, Phoxinus phoxinus, Pterophyllum scalare, Xenopoecilus sarasinorum, and Trichogaster trichopterus. Results revealed a consistent left-eye preference during sustained fixation in all of the five species. Males of G. holbrooki, which do not normally show any social behaviour, did not exhibit any eye preferences during mirror-image inspection. We found, however, that they could be induced to manifest a left-eye preference, likewise females, if tested soon after capture, when some affiliative tendencies can be observed. These findings add to current evidence in a variety of vertebrate species for preferential involvement of structures located in the right side of the brain in response to the viewing of conspecifics.
|
|
|
|
Krause Hoare, Hemelrijk, & Rubenstein. (2000). Leadership in fish shoals. Fish Fish, 1, 82–89.
Abstract: Leadership is not an inherent quality of animal groups that show directional locomotion. However, there are other factors that may be responsible for the occurrence of leadership in fish shoals, such as individual differences in nutritional state between group members. It appears that front fish have a strong influence on directional shoal movements and that individuals that occupy such positions are often characterised by larger body lengths and lower nutritional state. Potential interactions between the two factors and their importance for positioning within shoals need further attention. Initiation of directional movement in stationary shoals and position preferences in mobile shoals need to be addressed separately because they are potentially subject to different constraints. Individuals that initiate a swimming direction may not necessarily be capable of the sustained high swimming performance required to keep the front position or have the motivation to do so, for that matter. More empirical and theoretical work is necessary to look at the factors controlling positioning behaviour within shoals, as well as overall shoal shape and structure. Tracking of marked individuals whose positioning behaviour is monitored over extended time periods of hours or days would be useful. There is an indication that shoal positions are rotated by individuals according to their nutritional needs, with hungry fish occupying front positions only for as long as necessary to regain their nutritional balance. This suggests that shoal members effectively take turns at being leaders. There is a need for three-dimensional recordings of shoaling behaviour using high-speed video systems that allow a detailed analysis of information transfer in shoals of different size. The relationship between leadership and shoal size might provide an interesting field for future research. Most studies to date have been restricted to shoals of small and medium size and more information on larger shoals would be useful.
|
|
|
|
Connor, R. C., Wells, R. S., Mann, J., & Read, A. J. (2000). The bottlenose dolphin: Social relationships in a fission-fusion society. In J. Mann, R. C. Connor, P. L. Tyack, & H. Whitehead (Eds.), Cetacean Societies: Field Studies of Dolphins and Whales. (pp. 91–126). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Abstract: Book Description
“Part review, part testament to extraordinary dedication, and part call to get involved, Cetacean Societies highlights the achievements of behavioral ecologists inspired by the challenges of cetaceans and committed to the exploration of a new world.”-from the preface by Richard Wrangham
Long-lived, slow to reproduce, and often hidden beneath the water's surface, whales and dolphins (cetaceans) have remained elusive subjects for scientific study even though they have fascinated humans for centuries. Until recently, much of what we knew about cetaceans came from commercial sources such as whalers and trainers for dolphin acts. Innovative research methods and persistent efforts, however, have begun to penetrate the depths to reveal tantalizing glimpses of the lives of these mammals in their natural habitats.
Cetacean Societies presents the first comprehensive synthesis and review of these new studies. Groups of chapters focus on the history of cetacean behavioral research and methodology; state-of-the-art reviews of information on four of the most-studied species: bottlenose dolphins, killer whales, sperm whales, and humpback whales; and summaries of major topics, including group living, male and female reproductive strategies, communication, and conservation drawn from comparative research on a wide range of species.
Written by some of the world's leading cetacean scientists, this landmark volume will benefit not just students of cetology but also researchers in other areas of behavioral and conservation ecology as well as anyone with a serious interest in the world of whales and dolphins.
Contributors are Robin Baird, Phillip Clapham, Jenny Christal, Richard Connor, Janet Mann, Andrew Read, Randall Reeves, Amy Samuels, Peter Tyack, Linda Weilgart, Hal Whitehead, Randall S. Wells, and Richard Wrangham.
Keywords: cetacean social behavior, male alliance formation, most cetacean species, platanistid river dolphins, cetacean sociality, strategies and social bonds, female cetaceans, many cetologists, most mysticetes, sperm whale calves, passive fishing nets, variant whistles, historical whaling records, cetacean systematics, stable matrilineal groups, peak calving season, suction cup tags, mutualistic groups, cetacean vocalizations, focal animal studies, larger odontocetes, predictive signaling, individual cetaceans, sperm whale clicks, resident killer whales
|
|
