|
|
Meester J, S. H., & W. Setzer, H. W. (Eds.). (1971). The mammals of Africa (Vol. Part 14). City of Washington: Smithsonian Press.
|
|
|
|
Miller, R., & Denniston, R. H. (1979). Interband dominance in feral horses. Z. Tierpsychol., 51, 41–47.
|
|
|
|
PITRA, C. H., STREICH, W. J., REINSCH, A., & FICKEL, J. (1995). Die Population des Somali-Wildesels (Equus africanus somalicus Sclater) in menschlicher Obhut: Demographische und genetische Aspekte. Zool. Garten., N.F. 65(4), 245–257.
|
|
|
|
Schilder, M. B. H. (1988). Dominance relationships between adult Plains zebra stallions in semi – captivity. Behaviour, 104(3-4), 300–319.
Abstract: The relationships between 4-5 adult zebra stallions, living in a safari park, were investigated over a period of 5 years. Asymmetries in the distributions of a number of behaviours could be explained by adopting dominance as an intervening variable. Dominance in stallions was of a bipolar nature with on the one hand behaviours representing subordinance and defence, and on the other hand behaviours reinforcing and confirming dominance. Expression of formal dominance seems to play a minor role. The dyadic relationships of stallions differed as to the number of behaviours reflecting dominance relationships. Although often linear rank-orders could be constructed, these rank-orders were not necessarily identical. This means that the concept of dominance is of only limited value for describing relationships between zebra stallions.
|
|
|
|
Schilder, M. B. H. (1990). Interventions in a herd of semi – captive Plains zebras. Behaviour, 112(1-2), 53–83.
Abstract: n a herd of semi-captive plains zebras interventions, which occurred within the harems, were investigated in order to answer the question why zebras interfered. These interventions are of interest because they regulate the contacts between companions and because, as corrective and preventive measures, they reveal the normative principles underlying the behaviours by which animals structure their social environment. An attempt was made to deduce 1) the internal norms of the interferer; 2) his short term aims; 3) his tactis and 4) his perception of the social environment. The analysis revealed that in the case of an affiliative interaction foals, yearlings and adult mares started to interfere if a friend had an affiliative contact with another zebra. In view of the interferer's behaviours it was concluded that their aim was to break off the ongoing interaction and that zebras tended to protect friendship bonds. Foals and yearlings further interfered if their mother was being threatened, attacked or sexually approached by a stallion. In view of the interferer's behaviours its aim was to prevent iminent interactions or to break off ongoing interactions. This suggests that these interventions were of a protective nature. The interferer's behaviours in both contexts ware very much alike. Mares tended to interfere if their foal/yearling or adult daughter was threathened or aggressed or if a mare friend was being sexually approached by a stallion. This type of intervention was of a protective nature. Stallions in a multi male harem showed a high tendency to interfere in courtship interactions. From the resemblance between interventions in courtship and in aggressive interactions it is concluded that, at leat in a number of cases, the individuals have perceived courtship behaviour by the stallion as a threat towards the mare involved.
|
|
|
|
Schilder, M. B. H. (1990). Social behaviour and social arganization of a herd of plains zebra in a safari park. Ph.D. thesis, , University of Utrecht.
|
|
|
|
Würbel, H. (1990). The relationship between social structure and mating system in donkeys & Mating strategies of male donkeys in a promiscuous mating system"l structure and mating system in donkeys &. Diploma thesis, , Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Berne, Switzerland.
|
|
|
|
Lynch, J. J., Hinch, G. N., Bouissou, M. F., Elwin, R. L., Green, G. C., & Davies, H. I. (1989). Social organization in young Merino and Merino x Border Leicester ewes. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 22(1), 49–63.
Abstract: The social behaviour of two groups of Merino ewes and one group of Merino x Border Leicester ewes was studied. Each group comprised eight sheep, 15 months of age and, within each group, the animals were of similar liveweight. Dominance rankings were established at each test, but there was little consistency in ewe rank over time. Similarly, little consistency was found in ewe ranking for movement order between pens, and for exploratory and fear test rankings. However, with tests on movement orders, some consistency in the sheep which ranked first was shown. In the field, no aggression was seen while sheep were grazing and there were no occasions when ranking related to movement could be observed. There were short-term associations between pairs of sheep, but these occurred in less than half the individuals. Although the spatial distribution was not studied, the lack of long-term association between pairs would suggest that strong spatial preference does not occur. It is concluded that the social organization of single-age Merino and Merino x Border Leicester ewes is not based on dominance or leadership ranking nor on long-term associations between individuals.
|
|
|
|
Southwick, C. H., & Siddiqi, M. R. (1967). The role of social tradition in the maintenance of dominance in a wild rhesus group. Primates, 8(4), 341–353.
Abstract: Following the injury and disability of the dominant male, the home range of a group of rhesus in a rural habitat in Aligarh district was significantly reduced from 40 acres to less than 10 acres. Throughout this injury and prior to his death, the male maintained his dominance in reference to a peripheral male who frequently attempted to enter the group. Upon the death of the dominant male, group leadership and dominance was assumed by a young subdominant male within the group and the peripheral male still remained outside the group. These observations indicate a strong social tradition in the maintenance of dominance within this wild rhesus group, and they emphasize the role of the dominant male in maintaining home range.
|
|
|
|
di Bitetti, M. S., & Janson, C. H. (2001). Social foraging and the finder's share in capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella. Anim. Behav., 62(1), 47–56.
Abstract: Group living can confer advantages to individuals, but it can also impose severe costs through resource competition. Kleptoparasitism is one example in which some individuals (joiners) can exploit the food discovered by other animals (finders). This type of social foraging has been modelled either as an information-sharing model or as a producer-scrounger game. An important variable in these models is the finder's advantage: the number of items obtained by the finder before the arrival of other individuals. In this study we describe how the spatial position and rank of individuals in a group of wild tufted capuchin monkeys affect their ability to discover and exploit new food sources. We also analyse the factors that affect the finder's share and the total amount of food obtained by the finder from a newly discovered resource. By placing platforms filled with bananas at novel locations in their home range, we show that animals in the leading edge of a foraging group have a higher probability of discovering new food sources than animals occupying other spatial positions. The alpha male and the alpha female, which tended to occupy central-forward positions, were able to monopolize newly discovered food sources and thus obtain a major share of them. The finder's share at the feeding platforms was smaller when there was more food on a platform, but increased with longer delays before the arrival of other individuals. The total amount of food obtained by the finder from the feeding platforms was larger when there was more food on the platform, when the finder was of higher social status, and when it took longer for other individuals to arrive. Animals can increase their finder's share and total amount consumed from a newly discovered resource by keeping large interindividual distances and by avoiding giving cues about the presence of food (such as food-associated vocalizations) to other animals.
|
|
