Abstract: Groups of animals often need to make communal decisions, for example about which activities to perform, when to perform them and which direction to travel in; however, little is known about how they do so. Here, we model the fitness consequences of two possible decision-making mechanisms: 'despotism' and 'democracy'. We show that under most conditions, the costs to subordinate group members, and to the group as a whole, are considerably higher for despotic than for democratic decisions. Even when the despot is the most experienced group member, it only pays other members to accept its decision when group size is small and the difference in information is large. Democratic decisions are more beneficial primarily because they tend to produce less extreme decisions, rather than because each individual has an influence on the decision per se. Our model suggests that democracy should be widespread and makes quantitative, testable predictions about group decision-making in non-humans.

Abstract: Personality in animal behaviour describes the observation that behavioural differences between individuals are consistent over time and context. Studies of group-living animals show that movement order among individuals is also consistent over time and context, suggesting that some individuals lead and others follow. However, the relationship between leadership and personality traits is poorly studied. We measured several personality traits and leadership of individual barnacle geese, Branta leucopsis. We measured body size and scored the dominance of individuals living in a stable group situation before subjecting them to an open-field test, an activity test, a novel-object test, and a leadership test in which the order of the movement of individuals in pairs towards a feeding patch was scored. We found high repeatability for activity and novel-object scores over time. Leadership was strongly correlated with novel-object score but not with dominance rank, activity or exploration in an open field. These results provide evidence that leadership is closely related to some aspects of personality. Interestingly, an individual's arrival at the food patch was affected not only by the novel-object score of the focal individual, but also by the novel-object score of the companion individual, indicating that movement patterns of individuals living in groups are affected by the personality traits of other group members and suggesting that movement patterns of a group may be shaped by the mix of personality types present in the group.

Abstract: The role of dominant individuals in leading groups of animals is not yet well understood. We investigated whether dominant beef cows, Bos taurus, have more influence on herd movement on pasture than more subordinate cows. A herd of 15 Gasconne cows was observed for a 3-week period between dawn and dusk. The positions of all adult cows were recorded with GPS collars at 1 min intervals and the behaviour of each cow was recorded in 5 min scans. The dominance hierarchy was recorded by ad libitum sampling. Through cluster analysis of the recorded data, we distinguished three herd behaviour patterns: resting, foraging and travelling. Dominant cows were closer to the front of the herd during both travelling and foraging. During travelling, more dominant cows also had more direct trajectories and were more aligned both with their nearest neighbours and with the whole herd. During foraging, the trajectories of dominant cows were shorter than those of subordinate cows. The results indicate that foraging and short-distance travelling movements by female beef cattle are not led by any particular individual but rather are influenced by a graded type of leadership; that is, the more dominant a cow is, the stronger the influence it may have on the movements of the herd.

Abstract: Many group-living animals show social preferences for relatives, familiar conspecifics or individuals of similar attributes such as size, personality or sex. How such preferences could affect the collective motion of animal groups has been rather unexplored. We present a general model of collective animal motion that includes social connections as preferential reactions between individuals. Our conceptual examples illustrate the possible impact of underlying social networks on the collective motion of animals. Our approach shows that the structure of these networks could influence: (1) the cohesion of groups; (2) the spatial position of individuals within groups; and (3) the hierarchical dynamics within such groups. We argue that the position of individuals within a social network and the social network structure of populations could have important fitness implications for individual animals. Counterintuitive results from our conceptual examples show that social structures can result in unexpected group dynamics. This sharpens our understanding of the way in which collective movement can be interpreted as a result of social interactions.

Abstract: Removing a horse from its social group may be considered risky, both for the handler and the horse, because other horses can interfere in the catching process. The main aim of this study was to identify where and when these risk situations occur while removing a horse from its group. A potential risk situation was defined by the closeness of loose horses in the group or by any physical contact with them. Whether the number of horses following would be influenced by the social rank of the horse being led out, and whether more horses would follow to the gate when a larger proportion of the group was removed compared to when a single horse was taken out were also investigated. Thirty-two mares (1–2 years) were kept in groups of four. All horses were taken out of their home paddock twice alone (64 tests) and twice with a companion (32 tests). One handler (or two handlers when two horses were removed) was asked to approach (phase 1) and catch the target horse (phase 2), walk it to the centre of the paddock and remain stationary at a post for 30 s (phase 3), walk to the paddock entrance (phase 4) and through the gate (phase 5). The number of horses following, and the number of loose horses in proximity (<2 m, 2–5 m) to the target horse and handler was estimated, and horse–horse and horse–human interactions were recorded continuously for the five scoring phases. Significantly more loose horses were within 2 m of a single target horse during the phases approach (mean ± SD: 1.5 ± 0.8), catch (1.6 ± 0.9) and post (1.7 ± 0.7) than during walk (1.0 ± 0.5) and gate (1.1 ± 0.6). Rank did not influence the number of horses following to the gate (high rank: 2.4 ± 0.7; lower rank: 2.0 ± 1.0; P = 0.396) and interactions between horses were rare. A greater proportion of the loose horses followed when two horses (0.9 ± 0.2) were removed compared to when a single horse (0.7 ± 0.3) was taken out (P = 0.011). In conclusion, maintaining a distance to other horses in the group by reducing the time being relatively stationary, so giving loose horses fewer chances to approach, is likely to contribute to improved handler's safety. Removing a small proportion of the group may also decrease the probability of the other horses following.