Records |
Author |
Granquist, S.M.; Thorhallsdottir, A.G.; Sigurjonsdottir, H. |
Title |
The effect of stallions on social interactions in domestic and semi feral harems |
Type |
Journal Article |
Year |
2012 |
Publication |
Applied Animal Behaviour Science |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
Volume |
141 |
Issue |
1–2 |
Pages |
49-56 |
Keywords |
Horses; Hierarchy; Icelandic horse; Social behaviour; Social bonds |
Abstract |
Earlier research indicates that stallions may supress interactions of their harem members, leading to less stable hierarchies and friendship bonds in harems compared to non-stallion groups. In this paper, the effect of the presense of a stallion on the social behaviour of mares was studied by comparing six harems containing stallions to four mixed sex groups not containing stallions. Both temporary and permanent harems were studied, giving the possibility to investigate the effect of group stability on social interactions. A significant linear hierarchy was found in all non-stallion groups that were used for comparison, while the hierarchies were only found to be linear in three of the six harems containing stallions (Landaus h', p < 0.05). Aggression rate was lower (t-test, p < 0.05) and fewer friendship bonds (G-test, p < 0.0001) were found within the harems, compared to the groups without stallions. Stallions seldom intervene directly in interactions between harem members. Thus, our results give support to the hypothesis that stallions may suppress interactions of harem members, but in a more indirect way than with direct interference. In addition, our results give support for earlier findings that aggression rate may be affected by group stability. We found a higher aggression rate in the temporary harems compared to the permanent harems (Kruskal–Wallis, p < 0.05) and in the temporary non-stallion group compared to the permanent non-stallion group. The results have significance for further research on social structure of mammals, and may be applied in management of domestic animals. |
Address |
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
ISSN |
0168-1591 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5619 |
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
Author |
Massen, J.; Sterck, E.; de Vos, H. |
Title |
Close social associations in animals and humans: functions and mechanisms of friendship |
Type |
|
Year |
2010 |
Publication |
Behaviour |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
Volume |
147 |
Issue |
11 |
Pages |
1379 |
Keywords |
Both humans and group-living animals associate and behave affiliatively more with some individuals than others. Human friendship has long been acknowledged, and recently scientists studying animal behaviour have started using the term friendship for close social associates in animals. Yet, while biologists describe friends as social tools to enhance fitness, social scientists describe human friendship as unconditional. We investigate whether these different descriptions reflect true differences in human friendship and animal close social associations or are a by-product of different research approaches: namely social scientists focussing on proximate and biologists on ultimate explanations. We first stress the importance of similar measures to determine close social associations, thereafter examine their ultimate benefits and proximate motivations, and discuss the latest findings on the central-neural regulation of social bonds. We conclude that both human friendship and animal close social associations are ultimately beneficial. On the proximate level, motivations for friendship in humans and for close social associations in animals are not necessarily based on benefits and are often unconditional. Moreover, humans share with many animals a similar physiological basis of sociality. Therefore, biologists and social scientist describe the same phenomenon, and the use of the term friendship for animals seems justified. |
Abstract |
Both humans and group-living animals associate and behave affiliatively more with some individuals than others. Human friendship has long been acknowledged, and recently scientists studying animal behaviour have started using the term friendship for close social associates in animals. Yet, while biologists describe friends as social tools to enhance fitness, social scientists describe human friendship as unconditional. We investigate whether these different descriptions reflect true differences in human friendship and animal close social associations or are a by-product of different research approaches: namely social scientists focussing on proximate and biologists on ultimate explanations. We first stress the importance of similar measures to determine close social associations, thereafter examine their ultimate benefits and proximate motivations, and discuss the latest findings on the central-neural regulation of social bonds. We conclude that both human friendship and animal close social associations are ultimately beneficial. On the proximate level, motivations for friendship in humans and for close social associations in animals are not necessarily based on benefits and are often unconditional. Moreover, humans share with many animals a similar physiological basis of sociality. Therefore, biologists and social scientist describe the same phenomenon, and the use of the term friendship for animals seems justified. |
Address |
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
5813 |
Permanent link to this record |