Abstract: A previously described (Windschnurer et al., 2009) avoidance distance test was used to assess animals’ fear of humans in order to quantify the human–animal relationship (HAR). This study investigated the influence of the dominant and flightiest animals within a group on the responsiveness of animals during the avoidance distance test. Eighty-eight pregnant heifers comprised of four different genotypes were used (22 animals per genotype): Limousin × Holstein-Friesian, Limousin × Simmental, Charolais × Limousin, and Charolais × Simmental. Sixty of the 88 heifers were group housed (n = 5) into 12 pens with 3 pens per breed, while 28 heifers were singly housed (seven heifers per breed). A reactivity test was performed on days 10, 18, 25 and 30 post-housing on the singly housed heifers, and then on the group housed heifers, on the same days, to calculate a reactivity score. On days 33 and 37 flight and dominance tests, respectively, were performed to identify the flightiest and the dominant animal within each group. On day 41, an avoidance test, measuring both the avoidance distance towards a familiar and an unfamiliar human, was performed on all heifers. No difference (P > 0.05) in reactivity scores was found between the genotypes, between pens for the group housed heifers or between singly housed and group housed heifers (P = 0.28). The avoidance distance (AD) of singly (S) housed heifers towards a familiar (F) (ADSF) human was shorter (P < 0.001) than the avoidance distance of group (G) housed heifers towards an unfamiliar human (ADSU). The ADSF and ADGF were correlated with the ADSU and ADGU (R = 0.87 for singly housed heifers; R = 0.61 for group housed heifers, P < 0.001). For the singly housed heifers, no correlation was observed between reactivity score and ADSF (R = 0.36, P = 0.18), whereas the reactivity score and ADSU were correlated (R = 0.68, P = 0.004). For the group housed heifers no significant correlation was detected between the reactivity score and ADGF (R = 0.18, P = 0.22) or ADGU (R = &#8722;0.11, P = 0.39). No influence of the most dominant animal and the flightiest animals was found on the behaviour of the group in term of avoidance distance and reactivity (P > 0.05). It is concluded that the assessment of the fear of the animals towards humans using the avoidance test at the feed bunk may be useful for singly and group housed heifers and that the leaders of a group such as the flightiest animal or the dominant animal did not influence the avoidance distance test.

Abstract: The likelihood of reconciliation (defined as preferential peaceful contact among former opponents following conflicts) has been predicted to vary positively with relationship value and compatibility, and negatively with relationship security. Long-term data on wild white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus) indicate that dyads consisting of an adult female and an alpha male have high value and compatibility, but low security. Two studies of C. capucinus postconflict (PC) behavior were carried out at Lomas Barbudal Biological Reserve, Costa Rica. One study consisted of 30-min PC and matched control (MC) follows. The second study extracted PC and MC periods from long follows, yielding PC/MC periods averaging 105 min. In study 2, but not study 1, significantly more PC/MC pairs were attracted (former opponents affiliated with each other sooner in the PC period than in the MC period) than were dispersed (former opponents affiliated with each other sooner in the MC period than in the PC period). Reconciliation in study 2 could not be explained as a by-product of former opponents' tendency to seek affiliative contact with conspecifics generally, or of the spatial proximity of opponents following conflicts. Attempted reconciliation was less likely to be followed by renewed aggression when reconciliation attempts were delayed following conflicts. The data were insufficient for a formal test of differences in conciliatory tendency (the difference between the number of attracted and dispersed PC/MC pairs, divided by the total number of pairs) among dyad types to be conducted.

Abstract: Social status can influence an animal's immune and reproductive functions, eventually leading to alterations in immunocompetence and reproductive success. Here, we report that rank assessed in a food competition test, considered as an index of social status, has significant influences on humoral immune functions in male Brandt's voles (Lasiopodomys brandtii) living in a group. Our data reveal a negative correlation of the spleen mass and serum antibody levels with social status, as well as a positive correlation of serum cortisol levels with social status. Males winning in food competition had a smaller spleen, a lower level of serum antibodies, and a higher level of serum cortisol than did their conspecific counterparts. These data indicate interactions between social status and humoral immune functions and might illustrate a trade-off between infection risks and reproductive success in male Brandt's voles.

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.

Abstract: Males in multi-male groups of chacma baboons (Papio hamadryas ursinus) in Botswana compete for positions in a linear dominance hierarchy. Previous research suggests that males treat different categories of rivals differently; competitive displays between males of similar rank are more frequent and intense than those between disparately ranked males. Here we test whether males also respond differently to male-male interactions in which they are not directly involved, using playbacks of the loud 'wahoo' calls exchanged between competing males in aggressive displays. We played paired sequences of vocal contests between two adjacently ranked and two disparately ranked males to ten subjects, half ranking below the signalers in the call sequences and half above. Subjects who ranked above the two signalers showed stronger responses than lower-ranking subjects. Higher-ranking subjects also responded more strongly to sequences involving disparately ranked, as opposed to adjacently ranked opponents, suggesting that they recognized those individuals' relative ranks. Strong responses to sequences between disparately ranked opponents might have occurred either because such contests typically involve resources of high fitness value (defense of meat, estrous females or infants vulnerable to infanticide) or because they indicate a sudden change in one contestant's condition. In contrast, subjects who ranked lower than the signalers responded equally strongly to both types of sequences. These subjects may have been able to distinguish between the two categories of opponents but did not respond differently to them because they had little to lose or gain by a rank reversal between males that already ranked higher than they did.