|
|
Poisbleau, M., Fritz, H., Valeix, M., Perroi, P. - Y., Dalloyau, S., & Lambrechts, M. M. (2006). Social dominance correlates and family status in wintering dark-bellied brent geese, Branta bernicla bernicla. Anim. Behav., 71(6), 1351–1358.
Abstract: In many gregarious species, including ducks and geese, being dominant provides more benefits than costs, because dominants have better access to resources essential for survival or reproduction. In geese, being in better body condition during migration towards the breeding grounds positively influences reproductive success. However, underlying proximate mechanisms linking prebreeding body condition on the wintering grounds to breeding success remain poorly understood. We investigated social dominance correlates and family status, in three consecutive winters, in a free-ranging, migrating, dark-bellied brent goose population. Families with juveniles dominated pairs, and pairs dominated singletons. Dominance rank did not increase with the number of juveniles per family. Males were dominant over females. Social dominance and reproductive status for a given winter were significantly correlated with body mass, body size and body condition during the previous winter, suggesting that body condition in winter also affects subsequent breeding success and hence also dominance. Levels of testosterone and triiodothyronine were not correlated with immediate or later dominance or reproductive status. We discuss the role of family status as a signal of social status in determining reproductive strategies.
|
|
|
|
Poisbleau, M., Jenouvrier, S., & Fritz, H. (2006). Assessing the reliability of dominance scores for assigning individual ranks in a hierarchy. Anim. Behav., 72(4), 835–842.
Abstract: The dominance score (number of wins divided by the total number of interactions) is the most widely used procedure in field studies to rank individuals. Its reliability depends on the number of interactions on which it is calculated. However, most authors use it without any estimate of the associated error. We describe the precision associated with a dominance score estimate as a function of the number of interactions on which it is based, and hence provide a tool to plan field protocols and effort. The precision error decreases according to a power function with increasing number of interactions, but with more precision for extreme scores for any given number of interactions. We discuss the fact that the minimum number of interactions should be based on the precision associated with the 50% score, the least precise of all scores. We also emphasize the trade-off between recording effort and precision of the estimator, and give an example of our choice of 26 interactions for fieldwork on ducks and geese. When comparing individual ranks based on dominance scores with ranks given by the dominance matrix, we found a good correlation, with more mismatches around the middle of the hierarchy. This was consistent with the precision calculated with our model. We conclude that dominance score is a reliable tool, but conclusions must take into account the number of interactions on which the calculations are done. We also discuss the importance of initial assumptions and sources of bias in field studies.
|
|
|
|
de VRIES, H. A. N. (1998). Finding a dominance order most consistent with a linear hierarchy: a new procedure and review. Anim. Behav., 55(4), 827–843.
Abstract: A procedure for ordering a set of individuals into a linear or near-linear dominance hierarchy is presented. Two criteria are used in a prioritized way in reorganizing the dominance matrix to find an order that is most consistent with a linear hierarchy: first, minimization of the numbers of inconsistencies and, second, minimization of the total strength of the inconsistencies. The linear ordering procedure, which involves an iterative algorithm based on a generalized swapping rule, is feasible for matrices of up to 80 individuals. The procedure can be applied to any dominance matrix, since it does not make any assumptions about the form of the probabilities of winning and losing. The only assumption is the existence of a linear or near-linear hierarchy which can be verified by means of a linearity test. A review of existing ranking methods is presented and these are compared with the proposed method.
|
|
|
|
Miklósi, Á., & Soproni, K. (2006). A comparative analysis of animals' understanding of the human pointing gesture. Anim. Cogn., 9(2), 81–93.
Abstract: We review studies demonstrating the ability of some animals to understand the human pointing gesture. We present a 3-step analysis of the topic. (1) We compare and evaluate current experimental methods (2) We compare available experimental results on performance of different species and investigate the interaction of species differences and other independent variables (3) We evaluate how our present understanding of pointing comprehension answers questions about function, evolution and mechanisms. Recently, a number of different hypotheses have been put forward to account for the presence of this ability in some species and for the lack of such comprehension in others. In our view, there is no convincing evidence for the assumption that the competitive lifestyles of apes would inhibit the utilization of this human gesture. Similarly, domestication as a special evolutionary factor in the case of some species falls short in explaining high levels of pointing comprehension in some non-domestic species. We also disagree with the simplistic view of describing the phenomenon as a simple form of conditioning. We suggest that a more systematic comparative research is needed to understand the emerging communicative representational abilities in animals that provide the background for comprehending the human pointing gesture.
|
|
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2003). The Structure of Social Knowledge in Monkeys. In F. B. M. de Waal, & P. L. Tyack (Eds.), Animal Social Complexity: Intelligence, Culture, and Individualized Societies. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
|
|
|
|
Feh, C. (1999). Alliances and reproductive success in Camargue stallions. Anim. Behav., 57(3), 705–713.
Abstract: A study of a herd of Camargue horsesEquus caballus, showed that while the majority of high-ranking stallions held single-male harems, some sons of low-ranking mares, being low ranking themselves, formed alliances that could last a lifetime. The two stallions were each other's closest associate and preferential grooming partner. Alliances were based on coalitions in which either both partners confronted an intruder synchronously or the dominant of the pair tended the female(s) while the subordinate simultaneously displayed towards the rival. Alliance partners were of similar age but were not more closely related to each other than to other stallions in the herd. Long-term paternity data revealed that subordinates sired close to a quarter of the foals born into the alliance group, and significantly more foals than low-ranking stallions in the herd adopting a `sneak'-mating strategy. The dominant appeared to benefit from the presence of his subordinate partner. Fights occurred all year round, and the subordinate stallion of each alliance pair fought outside competitors more than twice as often as the dominant. Forming short-term alliances before defending mares on their own may enhance long-term reproductive success for both partners. Other benefits to both partners include higher survivorship of their foals and increased access to proven reproductive mares. These results suggest that the relationship between alliance partners is based on mutualism, but several conditions for reciprocity seem to be fulfilled: the benefit to the dominant (assistance in fights), and the benefit to the subordinate (access to reproduction), are both costly to the other partner and delayed in time.
|
|
|
|
Wilson, D. S., & Dugatkin, L. A. (1996). A reply to Lombardi & Hurlbert. Anim. Behav., 52(2), 423–425.
|
|
|
|
Nicol, C. J. (2000). Equine Stereotypies. In: Houpt K.A. (Ed.),. In Recent Advances in Companion Animal Behavior Problems. International Veterinary Information Service.
|
|
|
|
Dugatkin, L. A., & Wilson, D. S. (1994). Choice experiments and cognition: a reply to Lamprecht & Hofer. Anim. Behav., 47(6), 1459–1461.
|
|
|
|
Mesterton-Gibbons, M., & Dugatkin, L. A. (1997). Cooperation and the Prisoner's Dilemma: towards testable models of mutualism versus reciprocity. Anim. Behav., 54(3), 551–557.
Abstract: For the purpose of distinguishing between mutualism and reciprocity in nature, recent work on the evolution of cooperation has both oversimplifed and undersimplified the distinction between these two categories of cooperation. This article addresses the resulting issues of model testability, clarifies the role of time and argues that the category of `pseudo-reciprocity' is an unnecessary complication.
|
|
