|
Records |
Links |
|
Author |
Mesterton-Gibbons, M.; Dugatkin, L.A. |
|
|
Title |
Cooperation and the Prisoner's Dilemma: towards testable models of mutualism versus reciprocity |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1997 |
Publication |
Animal Behaviour. |
Abbreviated Journal |
Anim. Behav. |
|
|
Volume |
54 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
551-557 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
480 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Dugatkin, L.A.; Hoglund, J. |
|
|
Title |
Delayed breeding and the evolution of mate copying in lekking species |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1995 |
Publication |
Journal of Theoretical Biology |
Abbreviated Journal |
J. Theor. Biol. |
|
|
Volume |
174 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
261-267 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
Recent experimental evidence indicates that females may copy the mate choice of others. Here, we present a model for the evolution of mate copying strategies in lekking species. In the model, all females (copiers and non-copiers) assess male quality, but a copier's assessment of a male's quality increases after males have mated with other females. The model demonstrates that mate copying is favored when breeding late in the season has a relatively high cost. We hope that our results will spur empirical work quantifying the time constraints associated with breeding, thus allowing more direct tests of the model's predictions. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
482 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Dugatkin, L.A.; Bekoff, M. |
|
|
Title |
Play and the evolution of fairness: a game theory model |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
2003 |
Publication |
Behavioural Processes |
Abbreviated Journal |
Behav. Process. |
|
|
Volume |
60 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
209-214 |
|
|
Keywords |
Play; Fairness; Game theory |
|
|
Abstract |
Bekoff [J. Consci. Stud. 8 (2001) 81] argued that mammalian social play is a useful behavioral phenotype on which to concentrate in order to learn more about the evolution of fairness. Here, we build a game theoretical model designed to formalize some of the ideas laid out by Bekoff, and to examine whether `fair' strategies can in fact be evolutionarily stable. The models we present examine fairness at two different developmental stages during an individual's ontogeny, and hence we create four strategies--fair at time 1/fair at time 2, not fair at time 1/not fair at time 2, fair at time 1/not fair at time 2, not fair at time 1/fair at time 2. Our results suggest that when considering species where fairness can be expressed during two different developmental stages, acting fairly should be more common than never acting fairly. In addition, when no one strategy was evolutionarily stable, we found that all four strategies we model can coexist at evolutionary equilibrium. Even in the absence of an overwhelming database from which to test our model, the general predictions we make have significant implications for the evolution of fairness. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
488 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Dugatkin, L.A.; Earley, R.L. |
|
|
Title |
Group fusion: the impact of winner, loser, and bystander effects on hierarchy formation in large groups |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
2003 |
Publication |
Behavioral Ecology |
Abbreviated Journal |
Behav. Ecol. |
|
|
Volume |
14 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
367-373 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
We present the results of a series of computer simulations that examined the impact of winner, loser, and bystander effects on hierarchy formation in fused groups. These effects and their implications for hierarchy structure and aggressive interactions were first examined in small four-member groups. Subsequent to this, the two small groups were fused into a single larger group. Further interactions took place in this fused group, generating a new hierarchy. Our models demonstrate clearly that winner, loser, and bystander effects strongly influence both the structure and types of interactions that emerge from the fusion of smaller groups. Four conditions produced results in which the same general patterns were uncovered in pre- and postfusion groups: (1) winner effects alone, (2) bystander loser effects alone, (3) winner and bystander winner effects operating simultaneously, and (4) all four effects in play simultaneously. Outside this parameter space, hierarchy structure and the nature of aggressive interactions differed in pre- and postfusion groups. When only loser effects were in play, one of the two clear alphas from the prefused groups dropped in rank in the eight-member fused group. When bystander winner effects were in play, it was difficult to rank any of the eight individuals in the fused group, and players interacted almost exclusively with those that were not in their original four-member group. When loser and bystander loser effects operated simultaneously, two top-ranking individuals emerged in the fused groups, but the relative rank of the other players was difficult to assign. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
10.1093/beheco/14.3.367 |
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
519 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Dugatkin, L.A.; Godin, G.J. |
|
|
Title |
Predator inspection, shoaling and foraging under predation hazard in the Trinidadian guppy,Poecilia reticulata |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1992 |
Publication |
Environmental Biology of Fishes |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
|
Volume |
34 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
265-276 |
|
|
Keywords |
Antipredation – Social group – Feeding – Predation risk – Trade-off – Fish |
|
|
Abstract |
Guppies,Poecilia reticulata, living in stream pools in Trinidad, West Indies, approached a potential fish predator (a cichlid fish model) in a tentative, saltatory manner, mainly as singletons or in pairs. Such behavior is referred to as predator inspection behavior. Inspectors approached the trunk and tail of the predator model more frequently, more closely and in larger groups than they approached the predator's head, which is presumably the most dangerous area around the predator. However, guppies were not observed in significantly larger shoals in the stream when the predator model was present. In a stream enclosure, guppies inspected the predator model more frequently when it was stationary compared to when it was moving, and made closer inspections to the posterior regions of the predator than to its head. Therefore, the guppies apparently regarded the predator model as a potential threat and modified their behavior accordingly when inspecting it. Guppies exhibited a lower feeding rate in the presence of the predator, suggesting a trade-off between foraging gains and safety against predation. Our results further suggest that predator inspection behavior may account for some of this reduction in foraging. These findings are discussed in the context of the benefits and costs of predator inspection behavior. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
2176 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Wilson, D.S.; Dugatkin, L.A. |
|
|
Title |
A reply to Lombardi & Hurlbert |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1996 |
Publication |
Animal Behaviour. |
Abbreviated Journal |
Anim. Behav. |
|
|
Volume |
52 |
Issue |
2 |
Pages |
423-425 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
No abstract |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
475 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Dugatkin, L.A. |
|
|
Title |
Tit for Tat, by-product mutualism and predator inspection: a reply to Connor |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1996 |
Publication |
Animal Behaviour. |
Abbreviated Journal |
Anim. Behav. |
|
|
Volume |
51 |
Issue |
2 |
Pages |
455-457 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
487 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Dugatkin, L.A. |
|
|
Title |
Tendency to inspect predators predicts mortality risk in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata) |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1992 |
Publication |
Behavioral Ecology |
Abbreviated Journal |
Behav. Ecol. |
|
|
Volume |
3 |
Issue |
2 |
Pages |
124-127 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
Although predator inspection behavior in fishes has become a model system for examining game theoretical strategies such as Tit for Tat, the direct costs of inspection behavior have not been quantified. To begin quantifying such costs, I conducted an experiment that examined mortality due to predation as a function of predator inspection in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Before being subjected to a “survivorship” experiment, guppies were assayed for their tendency to inspect a predator. Groups were then composed of six guppies that differed in their tendency to inspect. These groups were placed into a pool containing a predator, and survivorship of guppies with different inspection tendencies was noted 36 and 60 h later. Results indicate that individuals that display high degrees of inspection behavior suffer greater mortality than their noninspecting shoalmates. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
10.1093/beheco/3.2.124 |
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
526 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Chase, I.D.; Bartolomeo, C.; Dugatkin, L.A. |
|
|
Title |
Aggressive interactions and inter-contest interval: how long do winners keep winning? |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1994 |
Publication |
Animal Behaviour. |
Abbreviated Journal |
Anim. Behav. |
|
|
Volume |
48 |
Issue |
2 |
Pages |
393-400 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
Abstract. Considerable evidence across many taxa demonstrates that prior social experience affects the outcome of subsequent aggressive interactions. Although the 'loser effect', in which an individual losing one encounter is likely to lose the next, is relatively well understood, studies of the 'winner effect', in which winning one encounter increases the probability of winning the next, have produced mixed results. Earlier studies differ concerning whether a winner effect exists, and if it does, how long it lasts. The variation in results, however, may arise from different inter-contest intervals and procedures for selecting contestants employed across previous studies. These methodological differences are addressed through a series of experiments using randomly selected winners and three different inter-contest intervals in the pumpkinseed sunfish, Lepomis gibbosus. The results indicate that a winner effect does in fact exist in pumpkinseed sunfish, but that it only lasts between 15 and 60 min. Based on these results, predictions about the behavioural dynamics of hierarchy formation are discussed, and it is suggested that it may be impossible, in principle, to predict the outcome of dominance interactions between some individuals before they are actually assembled to form a group. Finally, the possible mechanisms underlying the winner effect are explored. |
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
refbase @ user @ |
Serial |
873 |
|
Permanent link to this record |
|
|
|
|
Author |
Dugatkin, L.A. |
|
|
Title |
A comment on Lafleur et al.'s re-evaluation of mate-choice copying in guppies |
Type |
Journal Article |
|
Year |
1998 |
Publication |
Animal Behaviour. |
Abbreviated Journal |
Anim. Behav. |
|
|
Volume |
56 |
Issue |
2 |
Pages |
513-514 |
|
|
Keywords |
|
|
|
Abstract |
|
|
|
Address |
|
|
|
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
|
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
|
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
|
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
|
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
|
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
|
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
|
Call Number |
|
Serial |
1812 |
|
Permanent link to this record |