Abstract: Patterns of aggressive and affiliative behavior, such as counter aggression and reconciliation, are said to covary in the genus Macaca; this is referred to as the systematic variation hypothesis. These behavior patterns constitute a species dominance style. Van Schaik's [1989] socioecological model explains dominance style in macaques in terms of within- and between-group contest competition. Dominance style is also said to correlate with phylogeny in macaques. The present study was undertaken to examine phylogenetic and socioecological explanations of dominance style, as well as the systematic variation hypothesis. We collected data on counter aggression and reconciliation from a habituated group of Assamese macaques (Macaca assamensis) at the Tukeswari Temple in Assam, India. The proportion of agonistic episodes that involved counter aggression was relatively low. Counter aggression, however, occurred more often among males than among females, and it was most common when females initiated aggression against males. The conciliatory tendency for this group of Assamese macaques was 11.2%. The frequency of reconciliation was low for fights among males and for fights among females, but reconciliation was particularly rare for opposite-sexed opponents. Female social relationships were consistent with the systematic variation hypothesis, and suggest a despotic dominance style. A despotic dominance style in Assamese macaques weakens the correlation between dominance style and phylogeny in macaques, but it is not inconsistent with the socioecological model. Male-female relationships were not well explained by the despotic-egalitarian framework, and males may well have more tolerant social relationships than do females. Sex differences need to be considered when categorizing species according to dominance style.

Abstract: Factors related to dominance rank and the functions of aggression were studied in a herd of Sorraia horses, Equus caballus, under extensive management. Subjects were 10 adult mares 5-18 years old and a stallion introduced into the group for breeding. Dominance relationships among mares were clear, irrespective of rank difference, and remained stable after introduction of the stallion. The dominance hierarchy was significantly linear and rank was positively correlated with age and total aggressiveness. Higher-ranking mares received lower frequency and intensity of agonistic interactions. Nevertheless, higher-ranking dominants were not more likely to elicit submission from their subordinates than lower-ranking dominants. Neither close-ranking mares nor mares with less clear dominance relationships were more aggressive towards each other. Agonistic interactions seemed to be used more importantly in regulation of space than to obtain access to food or to reassert dominance relationships. Contexts of aggression were related to mare rank. The results suggest that dominance relationships based on age as a conventional criterion were established to reduce aggressiveness in a herd where the costs of aggression are likely to outweigh the benefits.

Abstract: Aggressive contests probably occur in networking environments where information about fighting ability is conveyed both to an opponent and to individuals peripheral to the fight itself, the bystanders. Our primary aim was to investigate the relative influences of eavesdropping and prior social experience on the dynamics of aggressive contests in Xiphophorus helleri. A bystander's ability to witness an encounter was manipulated using clear, one-way mirror, and opaque partitions. After watching (or not watching) the initial contest, the bystander encountered either the winner or loser of the bout. Treatment comparisons of bystander-winner or bystander-loser contest dynamics indicated the presence or absence of winner, loser, or eavesdropping effects. Winner and loser effects had negligible influences on bystander contest dynamics. Eavesdropping significantly reduced the bystander's propensity to initiate aggression, escalate, and win against seen winners regardless of whether the watched bout had escalated or not. Though eavesdropping had relatively little effect on bystander-loser contest dynamics, bystanders were less prone to initiate aggression and win against losers that had escalated in the witnessed bout. Thus, bystanders appear to preferentially retain and utilize information gained about potentially dangerous opponents (winners or persistent losers). Our data lend clear support for the importance of eavesdropping in visually based aggressive signalling systems.