|
|
Cameron, E. Z., Stafford, K. J., Linklater, W. L., & Veltman, C. J. (1999). Suckling behaviour does not measure milk intake in horses, Equus caballus. Anim. Behav., 57(3), 673–678.
Abstract: Studies of parental investment in mammals have frequently used suckling behaviour to estimate energy transfer from mother to offspring, and consequently to measure maternal input. Such studies assume that the more an offspring sucks, the more milk it will receive. This assumption has been questioned, and a review of the literature found little support for it. To test if suckling behaviour provided an accurate index of milk or energy intake we used a radioactive isotope technique to label the milk of thoroughbred mares and to measure milk transfer to foals. We found no significant linear relationship between usual measures of suckling behaviour and milk or energy intake. No behaviours associated with suckling nor with characteristics of mares and foals improved the relationship; only the number of butts associated with each suck episode even approached significance. If we had used suckling behaviour to test theories on differential maternal investment our conclusions would have been in error. For example, female foals tended to suck for longer than males did but there was no difference in the amount of milk transferred. Consequently, we show that measures of suckling behaviour do not adequately predict milk intake in the domestic horse and we suggest that conclusions about differential maternal investment in mammals based on suckling behaviour are likely to be in error. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.
|
|
|
|
Cameron, E. Z. (1998). Is suckling behaviour a useful predictor of milk intake? A review. Anim. Behav., 56(3), 521–532.
Abstract: In studies on mammalian parental investment, time spent suckling is often used as a predictor of the milk transferred from mother to infant. It is assumed that the rate of milk transfer is positively correlated with the time spent suckling. However, this assumption has not been tested and empirical studies show conflicting results. Nevertheless, in species in which suckling can readily be observed, time spent suckling is still used to measure milk transfer, although an increasing number of workers recognize that the measure is potentially inaccurate. A meta-analysis on studies that have correlated measures of time spent suckling with milk intake estimates based on weight gain revealed a weak positive relationship and significant heterogeneity between studies. Isotope-labelling techniques for the measurement of milk transfer independent of behaviour have been in use since the 1970s, particularly in studies of species in which suckling is difficult to observe. Only one study has attempted to correlate behavioural measures with independent isotope measures, and it found no relationship between the two measures. I suggest that researchers have avoided such a test as it is unlikely that a strong relationship will be found between milk transfer and suckling behaviour, and I discuss the various factors that confound the relationship and contribute to high heterogeneity between studies. Consequently, the assumption that milk transfer can be measured by time spent suckling has inadequate empirical foundation, and needs to be tested using isotope-labelling methods. Copyright 1998 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour
|
|
|
|
Wittemyer, G., & Getz, W. M. (2007). Hierarchical dominance structure and social organization in African elephants, Loxodonta africana. Anim. Behav., 73(4), 671–681.
Abstract: According to the socioecological framework, transitivity (or linearity) in dominance relationships is related to competition over critical resources. When a population is structured into groups, the intensity of between- versus within-group competition influences the form and function of its social organization. Few studies have compared the type and relative intensity of competition at these two levels. African elephants have well-structured social relations, providing an exemplary system for such a study. We report on dominance hierarchies among free-ranging elephants and evaluate the factors that drive their socioecological structure to lie in a region of the three-dimensional nepotism/despotism/tolerance space rarely observed among social species; namely, where non-nepotistic, transitive dominance hierarchies within groups emerge despite kin-based philopatry and infrequent agonistic interactions over widely distributed resources. We found significant transitivity in dominance hierarchies between groups. Dominance relations among the matriarchs of different social groups were primarily age based, rather than driven by physical or group size, and group matriarch rank influenced the dominance relationships among nonmatriarchal females in the population. Our results suggest that between-group dominance relationships induce tolerance among group members, which in combination with high group relatedness, reduces the benefits of nepotism. We postulate that cognitive abilities and high risk of injury in contests enhance winner and loser effects, facilitating the formation of transitive dominance relationships, despite widely distributed resources over which infrequent competition occurs. The interplay of cognitive abilities, winner and loser effects, resource distribution, and within- and between-group dominance relationships may produce behaviour in other strongly social mammals that differs from that predicted by a superficial application of current socioecological models.
|
|
|
|
Adams, E. S. (2005). Bayesian analysis of linear dominance hierarchies. Anim. Behav., 69(5), 1191–1201.
Abstract: Studies on social animals often seek to identify dominance hierarchies, in which individuals are ranked according to competitive abilities based on counts of wins and losses in pairwise encounters. I illustrate Bayesian approaches, based on the method of paired comparisons, for determining ranks and for estimating relationships between dominance ability and other attributes. Bayesian inference combines prior probability distributions for each unknown parameter with likelihood functions to produce the joint posterior probability distribution for the quantities of interest. In contrast to nonparametric techniques for inferring ranks, Bayesian models yield measures of certainty for each inference and allow rigorous estimates of correlations between ranks and covariates even when there is considerable uncertainty as to the ranks themselves. A possible objection to the Bayesian approach is that it appears to entail more restrictive assumptions than do simpler methods. However, simulations show that Bayesian inferences are more robust to deviations from these assumptions than are the results of nonparametric methods.
|
|
|
|
Jameson, K. A., Appleby, M. C., & Freeman, L. C. (1999). Finding an appropriate order for a hierarchy based on probabilistic dominance. Anim. Behav., 57(5), 991–998.
Abstract: Methods of ranking individuals in a dominance hierarchy that use transitivity of relationships may obscure irregularities. Furthermore, these methods use only a small proportion of the information available from dominance encounters. This paper presents an intuitively appealing and easily implemented alternative to existing methods for ordering dominance data, developed from the work of Batchelder et al. (1992Journal of Mathematical Psychology36, 185-212). The procedure presented here is based on a mathematical model of paired comparisons and it involves only simple estimation procedures. We illustrate its use with data on dominance among red deerCervus elaphus, stags. The results indicate that dominance relationships are well characterized by the scale values that the model provides, and, because the method provides predictions for all pairings of animals, dominance predictions also exist for pairs of animals that have yet to be observed. Moreover, the dominance outcomes predicted by the model using the order scale are highly correlated with actual dominance observations at all levels. Overall, the procedure described provides a solution to the problem of identifying an appropriate order for a near-linear dominance hierarchy.
|
|
|
|
Gammell, M. P., de Vries, H., Jennings, D. J., Carlin, C. M., & Hayden, T. J. (2003). David's score: a more appropriate dominance ranking method than Clutton-Brock et al.'s index. Anim. Behav., 66(3), 601–605.
|
|
|
|
de Vries, H., Stevens, J. M. G., & Vervaecke, H. (2006). Measuring and testing the steepness of dominance hierarchies. Anim. Behav., 71(3), 585–592.
Abstract: In the analysis of social dominance in groups of animals, linearity has been used by many researchers as the main structural characteristic of a dominance hierarchy. In this paper we propose, alongside linearity, a quantitative measure for another property of a dominance hierarchy, namely its steepness. Steepness of a hierarchy is defined here as the absolute slope of the straight line fitted to the normalized David's scores (calculated on the basis of a dyadic dominance index corrected for chance) plotted against the subjects' ranks. This correction for chance is an improvement of an earlier proposal by de Vries (appendix 2 in de Vries, Animal Behaviour, 1998, 55, 827-843). In addition, we present a randomization procedure for determining the statistical significance of a hierarchy's steepness, which can be used to test the observed steepness against the steepness expected under the null hypothesis of random win chances for all pairs of individuals. Whereas linearity depends on the number of established binary dominance relationships and the degree of transitivity in these relationships, steepness measures the degree to which individuals differ from each other in winning dominance encounters. Linearity and steepness are complementary measures to characterize a dominance hierarchy.
|
|
|
|
Poisbleau, M., Fritz, H., Valeix, M., Perroi, P. - Y., Dalloyau, S., & Lambrechts, M. M. (2006). Social dominance correlates and family status in wintering dark-bellied brent geese, Branta bernicla bernicla. Anim. Behav., 71(6), 1351–1358.
Abstract: In many gregarious species, including ducks and geese, being dominant provides more benefits than costs, because dominants have better access to resources essential for survival or reproduction. In geese, being in better body condition during migration towards the breeding grounds positively influences reproductive success. However, underlying proximate mechanisms linking prebreeding body condition on the wintering grounds to breeding success remain poorly understood. We investigated social dominance correlates and family status, in three consecutive winters, in a free-ranging, migrating, dark-bellied brent goose population. Families with juveniles dominated pairs, and pairs dominated singletons. Dominance rank did not increase with the number of juveniles per family. Males were dominant over females. Social dominance and reproductive status for a given winter were significantly correlated with body mass, body size and body condition during the previous winter, suggesting that body condition in winter also affects subsequent breeding success and hence also dominance. Levels of testosterone and triiodothyronine were not correlated with immediate or later dominance or reproductive status. We discuss the role of family status as a signal of social status in determining reproductive strategies.
|
|
|
|
Poisbleau, M., Jenouvrier, S., & Fritz, H. (2006). Assessing the reliability of dominance scores for assigning individual ranks in a hierarchy. Anim. Behav., 72(4), 835–842.
Abstract: The dominance score (number of wins divided by the total number of interactions) is the most widely used procedure in field studies to rank individuals. Its reliability depends on the number of interactions on which it is calculated. However, most authors use it without any estimate of the associated error. We describe the precision associated with a dominance score estimate as a function of the number of interactions on which it is based, and hence provide a tool to plan field protocols and effort. The precision error decreases according to a power function with increasing number of interactions, but with more precision for extreme scores for any given number of interactions. We discuss the fact that the minimum number of interactions should be based on the precision associated with the 50% score, the least precise of all scores. We also emphasize the trade-off between recording effort and precision of the estimator, and give an example of our choice of 26 interactions for fieldwork on ducks and geese. When comparing individual ranks based on dominance scores with ranks given by the dominance matrix, we found a good correlation, with more mismatches around the middle of the hierarchy. This was consistent with the precision calculated with our model. We conclude that dominance score is a reliable tool, but conclusions must take into account the number of interactions on which the calculations are done. We also discuss the importance of initial assumptions and sources of bias in field studies.
|
|
|
|
de VRIES, H. A. N. (1998). Finding a dominance order most consistent with a linear hierarchy: a new procedure and review. Anim. Behav., 55(4), 827–843.
Abstract: A procedure for ordering a set of individuals into a linear or near-linear dominance hierarchy is presented. Two criteria are used in a prioritized way in reorganizing the dominance matrix to find an order that is most consistent with a linear hierarchy: first, minimization of the numbers of inconsistencies and, second, minimization of the total strength of the inconsistencies. The linear ordering procedure, which involves an iterative algorithm based on a generalized swapping rule, is feasible for matrices of up to 80 individuals. The procedure can be applied to any dominance matrix, since it does not make any assumptions about the form of the probabilities of winning and losing. The only assumption is the existence of a linear or near-linear hierarchy which can be verified by means of a linearity test. A review of existing ranking methods is presented and these are compared with the proposed method.
|
|
