Abstract: There is growing evidence that macaque social systems represent sets of coadapted traits in which strength of hierarchies and degree of nepotism covary. A framework is developed to explain the link between dominance and kinship phenomena, assuming that power brought by alliances among non-kin is allometrically related to those involving relatives. This can account for the type of social relationships observed in “despotic” systems vs. “egalitarian” ones. When social bonds are mostly founded on kinship, lineages are closed and social power generated by coalitions among relatives may reach high levels; social power frequently outweighs the fighting abilities of single individuals, and asymmetry of dominance between group members may be marked. When lineages are more open, social bonds and alliances are less kin-biased, social relationships are more equal, and as the influence of coalitions is less important, the individual retains a certain degree of freedom in relation to the power of kin-networks. Acknowledging that the balance between individual and social power is not set at the same level across different species can explain a number of variations in rules of rank inheritance and relative dominance of males and females among macaques. The framework illustrates how epigenetic processes may shape complex features of primate social systems, and offers opportunities for testing.

Abstract: Dominance relationships in primate societies are generally inferred by analyses of agonistic interactions. This aspect of social organization is so striking in macaque and baboon societies that many theoreticians have postulated selective mechanisms operating on the genetic attributes which contribute to high dominance rank. Alpha males were hypothesized to increase their genetic fitness by successfully competing with other males for access to ovulating females. Evidence relevant to these speculations has been mixed. Whereas some investigators found alpha males had near exclusive sexual access to females, others failed to confirm preferential access to ovulating females. Indeed, considerable variability in competition for females existed not only among species, but also among troops of the same species living in different habitats. Further, partner selection was not an exclusive male prerogative; females proved to express active preferences for particular males as sexual partners, and these preferences were not related to high male aggressivity. Alpha males, however, were noted to maintain their positions through social skills as members of a central core or alliance, and high rank was related primarily to seniority. Moreover, alpha males responded actively to challenges to the troop and were judged to contribute significantly to the survival of infants. It was therefore hypothesized that increased genetic fitness related to the increased survival of immature animals in the troop, most of which would already be the offspring of senior (and hence alpha) males. Selection would then be for the social skills leading to successful alliances in troop defense. Such skills might also relate to female partner preferences thus increasing the reproductive effectiveness of alpha males at any point in their careers, including years prior to and following their assumption of alpha rank.

Abstract: Animals who live in groups need to divide available resources amongst themselves. This is often achieved by means of a dominance hierarchy, where dominant individuals obtain a larger share of the resources than subordinate individuals. This paper introduces a model of dominance hierarchy formation using a multi-player extension of the classical Hawk-Dove game. Animals play non-independent pairwise games in a Swiss tournament which pairs opponents against those which have performed equally well in the conflict so far, for a fixed number of rounds. Resources are divided according to the number of contests won. The model, and its emergent properties, are discussed in the context of experimental observations.

Abstract: This paper presents an antithesis to the view that gregarious behaviour is evolved through benefits to the population or species. Following Galton (1871) and Williams (1964) gregarious behaviour is considered as a form of cover-seeking in which each animal tries to reduce its chance of being caught by a predator.
It is easy to see how pruning of marginal individuals can maintain centripetal instincts in already gregarious species; some evidence that marginal pruning actually occurs is summarized. Besides this, simply defined models are used to show that even in non-gregarious species selection is likely to favour individuals who stay close to others.
Although not universal or unipotent, cover-seeking is a widespread and important element in animal aggregation, as the literature shows. Neglect of the idea has probably followed from a general disbelief that evolution can be dysgenic for a species. Nevertheless, selection theory provides no support for such disbelief in the case of species with outbreeding or unsubdivided populations.
The model for two dimensions involves a complex problem in geometrical probability which has relevance also in metallurgy and communication science. Some empirical data on this, gathered from random number plots, is presented as of possible heuristic value.

Abstract: When detecting a predator, some prey animals respond in a counterintuitive fashion by approaching, rather than fleeing, that potential threat of extinction. This seemingly paradoxical behaviour, known aspredator inspection, has been reported for a wide variety of taxa--and therefore can be assumed to be adaptive. However, the view of predator inspection as a paradoxical behaviour rests on two implicit assumptions: (a) initial predator detecting is unambiguous, with no uncertainty in discriminating between hunting and non hunting members of predator species, or members of predator species and unrelated phenomena; (b) the costs of flight are negligible relative to the risk of predation. Upon reflection assumption (a) is not really tenable. Whereas assumption (b) is not consistent with experimental evidence [Godin & Crossman (1994)Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol.34,359-366]. Given that predator detection is ambiguous and the costs of flight are not negligible, a prey individual may benefit by a closer approach to the source of the alarming signals, thus improving its assessment of the situation--despite the increased risk of predation. In this paper, the above statement is given rigor by reformulating the problem in game theoretical terms. The results indicate that a prey will minimize its costs by performing predator inspection whenever its degree of certainty regarding predator identification and/or assessment of its intentions is less than a threshold, which is determined by the model's parameters.