Abstract: We spent two winters studying the social behaviour of wild woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) at a time when their main food (ground lichens; Cladina sp.) is available only at snow craters dug by the animals. The competition for access to such craters was severe, the animals constantly trying to take over the craters of others. During a two-month period when a group maintained a constant size (20) and composition (all age-sex classes represented), we could rank the animals in a rather linear dominance hierarchy (Landau's index = 0.87). Rank was correlated with access to resources, percent of time spent active, and percent of time feeding in craters. It was also correlated with age and antler size. However, rank is not an attribute of individuals, but of a relationship between individuals. As such it is only an intervening variable between physical attributes and access to resources, a variable whose value has meaning only within a given group. Among the three attributes studied (age, sex, antler size), the latter was by far the best predictor of the occurrence and outcome of interactions. Between two individuals within any of the three age-sex classes studied (adult and yearling males and adult females), the one with larger antlers initiated significantly more often, escalated its aggression (to the point of hitting the target) less often, and enjoyed a higher success rate in obtaining resources. When their antlers were larger than those of an adult male target (i.e. males that had shed their antlers), adult females won almost all their interactions with adult males even though they escalated only one fourth of them. This clarifies the long-standing speculation that female caribou have antlers and shed them later than males, in order to overcome their sexual handicap in competition for food in the winter. We conclude that the link between rank and dominance of an individual on one hand, and some of its attributes on the other (e.g. sex, age, weight, antler size) is fundamentally realized by the animal itself through its active preference for targets it is likely to beat, i.e. targets with smaller antlers.

Abstract: The authors examine dominance and subordination in the social psychology, political science, and biology literatures. Using Summers and Winberg (2006) as a guide, the authors suggest that extreme dominance or subordination phenotypes--including social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism--are determined by an organism's genetic predispositions, motivations, stress responses, and long-term hormone release and uptake states. The authors offer hypotheses about the likely neurochemical profiles for each of these extreme dominance and subordination phenotypes and suggest two designs that begin to test these hypotheses.

Abstract: Three types of Colobus guereza groups may be distinguished on the bases of size and composition, namely small one-male groups, large, one-male groups and multi-male groups. The social structure of each type of group is described in terms of the distribution of non-agonistic interactions, the frequency and distribution of agonistic behaviour and the organization of the roles of vigilance, territorial defence and leadership. A number of differences are found between the group types which appear to be related to the differences in group size and composition. It is suggested that these group types represent stages in the life-cycle of colobus groups, and that such an interpretation may help to resolve some of the conflicting reports in the literature.

Abstract: In many different species it is common for animals to spend large portions of their lives in groups. Such groups need to divide available resources amongst the individuals they contain and this is often achieved by means of a dominance hierarchy. Sometimes hierarchies are stable over a long period of time and new individuals slot into pre-determined positions, but there are many situations where this is not so and a hierarchy is formed out of a group of individuals meeting for the first time. There are several different models both of the formation of such dominance hierarchies and of already existing hierarchies. These models often treat the two phases as entirely separate, whereas in reality, if there is a genuine formation phase to the hierarchy, behaviour in this phase will be governed by the rewards available, which in turn depends upon how the hierarchy operates once it has been formed. This paper describes a method of unifying models of these two distinct phases, assuming that the hierarchy formed is stable. In particular a framework is introduced which allows a variety of different models of each of the two parts to be used in conjunction with each other, thus enabling a wide range of situations to be modelled. Some examples are given to show how this works in practice.