Mori, E., Benatti, L., Lovari, S., & Ferretti, F. (2016). What does the wild boar mean to the wolf? European Journal of Wildlife Research, 63(1), 9.
Abstract: Generalist predators are expected to shape their diets according to the local availability of prey species. In turn, the extent of consumption of a prey would be influenced by the number of alternative prey species. We have tested this prediction by considering the wild boar and the grey wolf: two widespread species whose distribution ranges overlap largely in Southern Europe, e.g. in Italy. We have reviewed 16 studies from a total of 21 study areas, to assess whether the absolute frequency of occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet was influenced by (i) occurrence of the other ungulate species in diet and (ii) the number of available ungulate species. Wild boar turned out to be the main prey of the wolf (49% occurrence, on average), followed by roe deer (24%) and livestock (18%). Occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet decreased with increasing usage of roe deer, livestock, and to a lower extent, chamois and red deer. The number of prey species did not influence the occurrence of wild boar in the wolf diet. The wild boar is a gregarious, noisy and often locally abundant ungulate, thus easily detectable, to a predator. In turn, the extent of predation on this ungulate may not be influenced so much by the availability of other potential prey. Heavy artificial reductions of wild boar numbers, e.g. through numerical control, may concentrate predation by wolves on alternative prey (e.g. roe deer) and/or livestock, thus increasing conflicts with human activities.
|
Fedurek, P., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2009). What Does Mutual Grooming Tell Us About Why Chimpanzees Groom? Ethology, 115(6), 566–575.
Abstract: Grooming might be a resource that is offered in exchange for some benefit (e.g. access to a feeding site or coalitionary support) or it might be a mechanism for building and servicing social relationships, whose function, in turn, is to facilitate the exchange of resources and services. Bi-directional (or simultaneous mutual) grooming is unusually common among chimpanzees (though rare in other primates) and we suggest that this might be because it is an especially strong indicator of social bonding. Because the bonding role of bi-directional grooming offers substantially different predictions from the interpretation offered by the models based on reciprocal altruism (RA), we use a critical tests methodology (i.e. tests that unequivocally support one hypothesis at the expense of the other) to differentiate between the bonding and RA hypotheses. We use data on the dynamics of grooming interactions from a captive group of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) to show that dominant individuals tolerated the individuals with whom they performed bi-directional grooming more than they did those who typically provided them unidirectional grooming. Dominants rejected and terminated grooming sessions more often with the individuals who provided them with mostly unidirectional grooming than with those with whom they groomed bi-directionally. In addition, animals engaged in bi-directional grooming more often with both relatives and those with whom they were often in proximity. These results support the bonding model of mutually reciprocated grooming at the expense of the RA model, and suggest that, at least in chimpanzees, simultaneous mutual grooming may play a particularly important role in social bonding.
|
Giljov, A., Malashichev, Y., & Karenina, K. (2019). What do wild saiga antelopes tell us about the relative roles of the two brain hemispheres in social interactions? Anim. Cogn., .
Abstract: Two brain hemispheres are unequally involved in the processing of social stimuli, as demonstrated in a wide range of vertebrates. A considerable number of studies have shown the right hemisphere advantage for social processing. At the same time, an approach-withdrawal hypothesis, mainly based on experimental evidence, proposes the involvement of both brain hemispheres according to approach and withdrawal motivation. The present study aimed to test the relative roles of the two hemispheres in social responses displayed in a natural context. Visual biases, implicating hemispheric lateralization, were estimated in the social interactions of saiga antelope in the wild. In individually identified males, the left/right visual field use during approach and withdrawal responses was recorded based on the lateral head/body position, relative to the conspecific. Lateralized approach responses were investigated in three types of interactions, with left visual field bias found for chasing a rival, no bias--for attacking a rival, and right visual field bias--for pursuing a female. In two types of withdrawal responses, left visual field bias was found for retreating after fighting, while no bias was evident in fight rejecting. These findings demonstrate that neither the right hemisphere advantage nor the approach-withdrawal distinction can fully explain the patterns of lateralization observed in social behaviour. It is clear that both brain hemispheres play significant roles in social responses, while their relative contribution is likely determined by a complex set of motivational and emotional factors rather than a simple dichotomous distinction such as, for example, approach versus withdrawal motivation.
|
Skov-Rackette, S. I., & Shettleworth, S. J. (2005). What do rats learn about the geometry of object arrays? Tests with exploratory behavior. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process, 31(2), 142–154.
Abstract: Six experiments using habituation of exploratory behavior tested whether disoriented rats foraging in a large arena encode the shapes of arrays of objects. Rats did not respond to changes in position of a single object, but they responded to a change in object color and to a change in position of 1 object in a square array, as in previous research (e.g., C. Thinus-Blanc et al., 1987). Rats also responded to an expansion of a square array, suggesting that they encoded sets of interobject distances rather than overall shape. In Experiments 4-6, rats did not respond to changes in sense of a triangular array that maintained interobject distances and angles. Shapes of object arrays are encoded differently from shapes of enclosures.
|
|
Taylor, J. G. (2001). What do Neuronal Network Models of the Mind Indicate about Animal Consciousness? Animal Welfare, 10, 63–75.
|
|
Seyfarth, R. M., & Cheney, D. L. (2002). What are big brains for? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 99(7), 4141–4142.
|
|
Swanson, J. C. (1999). What are animal science departments doing to address contemporary issues? J. Anim Sci., 77(2), 354–360.
|
Emery, N. J., Dally, J. M., & Clayton, N. S. (2004). Western scrub-jays ( Aphelocoma californica) use cognitive strategies to protect their caches from thieving conspecifics. Anim. Cogn., 7(1), 37–43.
Abstract: Food caching birds hide food and recover the caches when supplies are less abundant. There is, however, a risk to this strategy because the caches are susceptible to pilfering by others. Corvids use a number of different strategies to reduce possible cache theft. Scrub-jays with previous experience of pilfering other's caches cached worms in two visuospatially distinct caching trays either in private or in the presence of a conspecific. When these storers had cached in private, they subsequently observed both trays out of reach of a conspecific. When these storers had cached in the presence of a conspecific, they subsequently watched the observer pilfering from one of the trays while the other tray was placed in full view, but out of reach. The storers were then allowed to recover the remaining caches 3 h later. Jays cached more worms when they were observed during caching. At the time of recovery, they re-cached more than if they had cached in private, selectively re-caching outside of the trays in sites unbeknown to potential thieves. In addition, after a single pilfering trial, the jays switched their recovery strategy from predominantly checking their caches (i.e. returning to a cache site to see whether the food remained there) to predominantly eating them. Re-caching remained constant across the three trials. These results suggest that scrub-jays use flexible, cognitive caching and recovery strategies to aid in reducing potential future pilfering of caches by conspecifics.
|
Dauphin, G., Zientara, S., Zeller, H., & Murgue, B. (2004). West Nile: worldwide current situation in animals and humans. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis, 27(5), 343–355.
Abstract: West Nile (WN) virus is a mosquito-borne flavivirus that is native to Africa, Europe, and Western Asia. It mainly circulates among birds, but can infect many species of mammals, as well as amphibians and reptiles. Epidemics can occur in rural as well as urban areas. Transmission of WN virus, sometimes involving significant mortality in humans and horses, has been documented at erratic intervals in many countries, but never in the New World until it appeared in New York City in 1999. During the next four summers it spread with incredible speed to large portions of 46 US states, and to Canada, Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. In many respects, WN virus is an outstanding example of a zoonotic pathogen that has leaped geographical barriers and can cause severe disease in human and equine. In Europe, in the past two decades there have been a number of significant outbreaks in several countries. However, very little is known of the ecology and natural history of WN virus transmission in Europe and most WN outbreaks in humans and animals remain unpredictable and difficult to control.
|
|
Komar, N. (2003). West Nile virus: epidemiology and ecology in North America. Adv Virus Res, 61, 185–234.
|
