|
|
Whiten, A., & McGrew, W. C. (2001). Is this the first portrayal of tool use by a chimp? (Vol. 409).
|
|
|
|
Whiten, A., Goodall, J., McGrew, W. C., Nishida, T., Reynolds, V., Sugiyama, Y., et al. (1999). Cultures in chimpanzees. Nature, 399(6737), 682–685.
Abstract: As an increasing number of field studies of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) have achieved long-term status across Africa, differences in the behavioural repertoires described have become apparent that suggest there is significant cultural variation. Here we present a systematic synthesis of this information from the seven most long-term studies, which together have accumulated 151 years of chimpanzee observation. This comprehensive analysis reveals patterns of variation that are far more extensive than have previously been documented for any animal species except humans. We find that 39 different behaviour patterns, including tool usage, grooming and courtship behaviours, are customary or habitual in some communities but are absent in others where ecological explanations have been discounted. Among mammalian and avian species, cultural variation has previously been identified only for single behaviour patterns, such as the local dialects of song-birds. The extensive, multiple variations now documented for chimpanzees are thus without parallel. Moreover, the combined repertoire of these behaviour patterns in each chimpanzee community is itself highly distinctive, a phenomenon characteristic of human cultures but previously unrecognised in non-human species.
|
|
|
|
Gilbert, B. K., & Hailman, J. P. (1966). Uncertainty of leadership-rank in fallow deer. Nature, 209(5027), 1041–1042.
|
|
|
|
Crook, J. H. (1983). On attributing consciousness to animals. Nature, 303(5912), 11–14.
|
|
|
|
Broom, M. (2002). A unified model of dominance hierarchy formation and maintenance. J. Theor. Biol., 219(1), 63–72.
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.
|
|
|
|
Viscido, S. V., Miller, M., & Wethey, D. S. (2002). The dilemma of the selfish herd: the search for a realistic movement rule. J. Theor. Biol., 217(2), 183–194.
Abstract: The selfish herd hypothesis predicts that aggregations form because individuals move toward one another to minimize their own predation risk. The “dilemma of the selfish herd” is that movement rules that are easy for individuals to follow, fail to produce true aggregations, while rules that produce aggregations require individual behavior so complex that one may doubt most animals can follow them. If natural selection at the individual level is responsible for herding behavior, a solution to the dilemma must exist. Using computer simulations, we examined four different movement rules. Relative predation risk was different for all four movement rules (p<0.05). We defined three criteria for measuring the quality of a movement rule. A good movement rule should (a) be statistically likely to benefit an individual that follows it, (b) be something we can imagine most animals are capable of following, and (c) result in a centrally compact flock. The local crowded horizon rule, which allowed individuals to take the positions of many flock-mates into account, but decreased the influence of flock-mates with distance, best satisfied these criteria. The local crowded horizon rule was very sensitive to the animal's perceptive ability. Therefore, the animal's ability to detect its neighbors is an important factor in the dynamics of group formation.
|
|
|
|
Viscido, S. V., Miller, M., & Wethey, D. S. (2001). The response of a selfish herd to an attack from outside the group perimeter. J. Theor. Biol., 208(3), 315–328.
Abstract: According to the selfish herd hypothesis, animals can decrease predation risk by moving toward one another if the predator can appear anywhere and will attack the nearest target. Previous studies have shown that aggregations can form using simple movement rules designed to decrease each animal's Domain of Danger. However, if the predator attacks from outside the group's perimeter, these simple movement rules might not lead to aggregation. To test whether simple selfish movement rules would decrease predation risk for those situations when the predator attacks from outside the flock perimeter, we constructed a computer model that allowed flocks of 75 simulated fiddler crabs to react to one another, and to a predator attacking from 7 m away. We attacked simulated crab flocks with predators of different sizes and attack speeds, and computed relative predation risk after 120 time steps. Final trajectories showed flight toward the center of the flock, but curving away from the predator. Path curvature depended on the predator's size and approach speed. The average crab experienced a greater decrease in predation risk when the predator was small or slow moving. Regardless of the predator's size and speed, however, predation risk always decreased as long as crabs took their flock-mates into account. We conclude that, even when flight away from an external predator occurs, the selfish avoidance of danger can lead to aggregation.
|
|
|
|
Hamilton, W. D. (1971). Geometry for the selfish herd. J. Theor. Biol., 31(2), 295–311.
Abstract: This paper presents an antithesis to the view that gregarious behaviour is evolved through benefits to the population or species. Following Galton (1871) and Williams (1964) gregarious behaviour is considered as a form of cover-seeking in which each animal tries to reduce its chance of being caught by a predator.
It is easy to see how pruning of marginal individuals can maintain centripetal instincts in already gregarious species; some evidence that marginal pruning actually occurs is summarized. Besides this, simply defined models are used to show that even in non-gregarious species selection is likely to favour individuals who stay close to others.
Although not universal or unipotent, cover-seeking is a widespread and important element in animal aggregation, as the literature shows. Neglect of the idea has probably followed from a general disbelief that evolution can be dysgenic for a species. Nevertheless, selection theory provides no support for such disbelief in the case of species with outbreeding or unsubdivided populations.
The model for two dimensions involves a complex problem in geometrical probability which has relevance also in metallurgy and communication science. Some empirical data on this, gathered from random number plots, is presented as of possible heuristic value.
|
|
|
|
Houpt, K. A., & Feldman, J. (1993). Animal behavior case of the month. Aggression toward a neonatal foal by its dam. J Am Vet Med Assoc, 203(9), 1279–1280.
|
|
|
|
Houpt, K. A., & Smith, R. (1993). Animal behavior case of the month. J Am Vet Med Assoc, 203(3), 377–378.
|
|
