Abstract: Coalitionary support in agonistic interactions represents cooperation because intervening in a fight is potentially costly to the donor of support but benefits the recipient. Here, we first review the characteristics of, and evolutionary forces favoring, intragroup coalitions in 49 species and find that patterns of intragroup coalition formation are remarkably similar between primates and nonprimates. We then test hypotheses suggesting kin selection, reciprocal altruism, and direct benefits as adaptive explanations for coalitionary interventions among adult female spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) belonging to a large social group in Kenya. As predicted by kin selection theory, females supported close kin most often, and the density (connectedness) of cooperation networks increased with genetic relatedness. Nevertheless, kinship failed to protect females from coalitionary attacks. We found no evidence of enduring alliances based on reciprocal support among unrelated adult females. Instead, donors generally minimized costs to themselves, intervening most often during low-intensity fights and when feeding opportunities were unavailable. Females also gained direct benefits from directing coalitionary attacks toward subordinates. Finally, females monitored the number of dominant bystanders in the “audience” at fights and modified their level of cooperation based on this knowledge. Overall, hyenas made flexible decisions regarding whether or not to intervene in fights, modifying their tendency to cooperate based on multiple types of information about their immediate social and ecological environments. Taken together, these findings indicate that the combined evolutionary forces of kin selection and direct benefits derived from reinforcing the status quo drive coalitionary interventions among adult female spotted hyenas.

Abstract: Considerable interspeci®c variation in female social relationships occurs in gregarious primates, particularly with regard to agonism and cooperation between females and to the quality of female relationships with males. This variation exists alongside variation in female philopatry and dispersal. Socioecological theories have tried to explain variation in female-female social relationships from an evolutionary perspective focused on ecological factors, notably predation and food distribution. According to the current ``ecological model'', predation risk forces females of most diurnal primate species to live in groups; the strength of the contest component of competition for resources within and between groups then largely determines social relationships between females. Social elationships among gregarious females are here characterized as DispersalEgalitarian, Resident-Nepotistic, Resident-Nepotistic-Tolerant, or Resident-Egalitarian. This ecological model has successfully explained i€erences in the occurrence of formal submission signals, decided dominance relation ships, coalitions and female philopatry. Group size and female rank generally a€ect female reproduction success as the model predicts, and studies of closely related species in di€erent ecological circumstances underscore the importance of the model. Some cases, however, can only be explained when we extend the model to incorporate the e€ects of infanticide risk and habitat saturation. We review evidence in support of the ecological model and test the power of alternative models that invoke between-group competition, forced female philopatry, demographic female recruitment, male interventions into female aggression, and male harassment.
Not one of these models can replace the ecological model, which already encompasses the between-group competition. Currently the best model, which explains
several phenomena that the ecological model does not, is a ``socioecological model'' based on the combined importance of ecological factors, habitat saturation and infanticide avoidance. We note some points of similarity and divergence with other mammalian taxa; these remain to be explored in detail.

Abstract: Few studies have experimentally tested the resource dispersion hypothesis (RDH). In this study, I tested whether space use and social organization of Gunnison’s prairie dog responded to changes in the dispersion and abundance of resources. Food manipulations were carried out during the reproductive and nonreproductive seasons across 2 years. Gunnison’s prairie dog adults responded to the experiments by decreasing territory size as food became patchier in space and time. Both males and females modified their home ranges, with no detectable difference between sexes, either prior to or during the experiments. As food became patchier in space and time, the spatial overlap of adults increased, whereas it decreased as food became more evenly dispersed. The average size of a group, defined as those individuals occupying the same territory, did not change significantly as a result of the experiments. Where changes in the composition and size of groups did occur, there was no indication that such changes were sex specific. Results from this study support critical components of the RDH and strongly suggest that patterns of space use and social structure in Gunnison’s prairie dogs are the result of individual responses to resource abundance and distribution.

Abstract: Group foragers may be able to assess patch quality more efficiently by paying attention to the sampling activities of conspecifics foraging in the same patch. In a previous field experiment, we showed that starlings foraging on patches of hidden food could use the successful foraging activities of others to help them assess patch quality. In order to determine whether a starling could also use another individual's lack of foraging success to assess and depart from empty patches more quickly, we carried out two experimental studies which compared the behaviour of captive starlings sampling artificial patches both when alone and when in pairs. Solitary starlings were first trained to assess patch quality in our experimental two-patch system, and were then tested on an empty patch both alone and with two types of partner bird. One partner sampled very few holes and thus provided a low amount of public information; the other sampled numerous holes and thus provided a high amount of public information. In experiment 1, we found no evidence of vicarious sampling. Subjects sampled a similar number of empty holes when alone as when with the low and high information partners; thus they continued to rely on their own personal information to make their patch departure decisions. In experiment 2, we modified the experimental patches, increasing the ease with which a bird could watch another's sampling activities, and increasing the difficulty of acquiring accurate personal sampling information. This time, subjects apparently did use public information, sampling fewer empty holes before departure when with the high-information partner than when with the low-information partner, and sampling fewer holes when with the low-information partner than when alone. We suggest that the degree to which personal and public information are used is likely to depend both on a forager's ability to remember where it has already sampled and on the type of environment in which foraging takes place.

Abstract: In many cooperatively breeding species, group members form a dominance hierarchy or queue to inherit the position of breeder. Models aimed at understanding individual variation in helping behavior, however, rarely take into account the effect of dominance rank on expected future reproductive success and thus the potential direct fitness costs of helping. Here we develop a kin-selection model of helping behavior in multimember groups in which only the highest ranking individual breeds. Each group member can invest in the dominant's offspring at a cost to its own survivorship. The model predicts that lower ranked subordinates, who have a smaller probability of inheriting the group, should work harder than higher ranked subordinates. This prediction holds regardless of whether the intrinsic mortality rate of subordinates increases or decreases with rank. The prediction does not necessarily hold, however, where the costs of helping are higher for lower ranked individuals: a situation that may be common in vertebrates. The model makes two further testable predictions: that the helping effort of an individual of given rank should be lower in larger groups, and the reproductive success of dominants should be greater where group members are more closely related. Empirical evidence for these predictions is discussed. We argue that the effects of rank on stable helping effort may explain why attempts to correlate individual helping effort with relatedness in cooperatively breeding species have met with limited success.