Abstract: We spent two winters studying the social behaviour of wild woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) at a time when their main food (ground lichens; Cladina sp.) is available only at snow craters dug by the animals. The competition for access to such craters was severe, the animals constantly trying to take over the craters of others. During a two-month period when a group maintained a constant size (20) and composition (all age-sex classes represented), we could rank the animals in a rather linear dominance hierarchy (Landau's index = 0.87). Rank was correlated with access to resources, percent of time spent active, and percent of time feeding in craters. It was also correlated with age and antler size. However, rank is not an attribute of individuals, but of a relationship between individuals. As such it is only an intervening variable between physical attributes and access to resources, a variable whose value has meaning only within a given group. Among the three attributes studied (age, sex, antler size), the latter was by far the best predictor of the occurrence and outcome of interactions. Between two individuals within any of the three age-sex classes studied (adult and yearling males and adult females), the one with larger antlers initiated significantly more often, escalated its aggression (to the point of hitting the target) less often, and enjoyed a higher success rate in obtaining resources. When their antlers were larger than those of an adult male target (i.e. males that had shed their antlers), adult females won almost all their interactions with adult males even though they escalated only one fourth of them. This clarifies the long-standing speculation that female caribou have antlers and shed them later than males, in order to overcome their sexual handicap in competition for food in the winter. We conclude that the link between rank and dominance of an individual on one hand, and some of its attributes on the other (e.g. sex, age, weight, antler size) is fundamentally realized by the animal itself through its active preference for targets it is likely to beat, i.e. targets with smaller antlers.

Abstract: The authors examine dominance and subordination in the social psychology, political science, and biology literatures. Using Summers and Winberg (2006) as a guide, the authors suggest that extreme dominance or subordination phenotypes--including social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism--are determined by an organism's genetic predispositions, motivations, stress responses, and long-term hormone release and uptake states. The authors offer hypotheses about the likely neurochemical profiles for each of these extreme dominance and subordination phenotypes and suggest two designs that begin to test these hypotheses.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Foraging in groups offers animals a number of advantages, such as increasing their likelihood of finding food or detecting and avoiding predators. In order for a group to remain together, there has to be some degree of coordination of behaviour and movement between its members (which may in some cases be initiated by a decision-making leader, and in other cases may emerge as an underlying property of the group). For example, behavioural synchronisation is a phenomenon where animals within a group initiate and then continue to conduct identical behaviours, and has been characterised for a wide range of species. We examine how a pair of animals should behave using a state-dependent approach, and ask what conditions are likely to lead to behavioural synchronisation occurring, and whether one of the individuals is more likely to act as a leader. RESULTS: The model we describe considers how the energetic gain, metabolic requirements and predation risks faced by the individuals affect measures of their energetic state and behaviour (such as the degree of behavioural synchronisation seen within the pair, and the value to an individual of knowing the energetic state of its colleague). We explore how predictable changes in these measures are in response to changes in physiological requirements and predation risk. We also consider how these measures should change when the members of the pair are not identical in their metabolic requirements or their susceptibility to predation. We find that many of the changes seen in these measures are complex, especially when asymmetries exist between the members of the pair. CONCLUSION: Analyses are presented that demonstrate that, although these general patterns are robust, care needs to be taken when considering the effects of individual differences, as the relationship between individual differences and the resulting qualitative changes in behaviour may be complex. We discuss how these results are related to experimental observations, and how the model and its predictions could be extended.