|
Packer, C., & Pusey, A. E. (1985). Asymmetric contests in social mammals: respect, manipulation and age-specific aspects. In P. J. Greenwood, M. Slatkin, & (Ed.), Evolution: Essays in Honour of John Maynard Smith (pp. 173–86). Camebridge: Camebridge University Press.
|
|
Epstein H,. (1984). Ass, mule and onager. In In Manson: Evolution of domesticatd animals. (pp. 174–184).
|
|
Rubenstein, D. I.,. (1986). Ecology and sociality in horses and zebras. In D. I. Rubenstein, & R. W. Wrangham (Eds.), Ecological Aspects of Social Evolution (pp. 282–302). Princeton, NJ.: Princeton University Press.
|
|
McGregor, P. K., & Dabelsteen, T. (1976). Communication Networks. In D. E. Kroodsma, & E. H. Miller (Eds.), Ecology and evolution of acoustic communication in birds (pp. 409–425). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
|
|
Giraldeau, L. - A. (1997). The ecology of information use. In J. R. Krebs, & N. B. Davies (Eds.), Behavioural ecology : an evolutionary approach. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell Science.
|
Krueger, K. (2008). Social Ecology of Horses. In j. Korb and J. Heinze (Ed.), Ecology of Social Evolution (pp. 195–206). Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Abstract: Horses (Equidae ) are believed to clearly demonstrate the links between ecology and social organization. Their social cognitive abilities enable them to succeed in many different environments, including those provided for them by humans, or the ones domestic horses encounter when escaping from their human care takers. Living in groups takes different shapes in equids. Their aggregation and group cohesion can be explained by Hamilton“s selfish herd theory. However, when an individual joins and to which group it joins appears to be an active individual decision depending on predation pressure, intra group harassment and resource availability. The latest research concerning the social knowledge horses display in eavesdropping experiments affirms the need for an extension of simple herd concepts in horses for a cognitive component. Horses obviously realize the social composition of their group and determine their own position in it. The horses exceedingly flexible social behavior demands for explanations about the cognitive mechanisms, which allow them to make individual decisions. ”Ecology conditions like those that favour the evolution of open behavioural programs sometimes also favour the evolution of the beginnings of consciousness, by favouring conscious choice. Or in other words, consciousness originates with the choice that are left open by open behavioural programs." Popper (1977)
|
|
Bergmüller, R. (2010). Animal Personality and Behavioural Syndromes. In P. Kappeler (Ed.), Animal Behaviour – Evolution and Mechanisms (pp. 587–621). Heidelberg: Springer.
|
van Schaik, C. P. (2010). Social learning and culture in animals. In P. Kappeler (Ed.), Animal Behaviour: Evolution and Mechanisms (pp. 623–653). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Abstract: Most animals must learn some of the behaviours in their repertoire, and some must learn most. Although learning is often thought of as an individual exercise, in nature much learning is social, i.e. under the influence of conspecifics. Social learners acquire novel information or skills faster and at lower cost, but risk learning false information or useless skills. Social learning can be divided into learning from social information and learning through social interaction. Different species have different mechanisms of learning from social information, ranging from selective attention to the environment due to the presence of others to copying of complete motor sequences. In vertical (or oblique) social learning, naïve individuals often learn skills or knowledge from parents (or other adults), whereas horizontal social learning is from peers, either immatures or adults, and more often concerns eavesdropping and public information use. Because vertical social learning is often adaptive, maturing individuals often have a preference for it over individual exploration. The more cognitively demanding social learning abilities probably evolved in this context, in lineages where offspring show long association with parents and niches are complex. Because horizontal learning can be maladaptive, especially when perishable information has become outdated, animals must decide when to deploy social learning. Social learning of novel skills can lead to distinct traditions or cultures when the innovations are sufficiently rare and effectively transmitted socially. Animal cultures may be common but to date taxonomic coverage is insufficient to know how common. Cultural evolution is potentially powerful, but largely confined to humans, for reasons currently unknown. A general theory of culture is therefore badly needed.
|
Kerth, G. (2010). Group decision-making in animal societies. In P. Kappeler (Ed.), Animal Behaviour: Evolution and Mechanisms (pp. 241–265). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Abstract: Individuals need to coordinate their activities to benefit from group living. Thus group decisions are essential for societies, especially if group members cooperate with each other. Models show that shared (democratic) decisions outperform unshared (despotic) decisions, even if individuals disagree about actions. This is surprising as in most other contexts, differences in individual preferences lead to sex-, age-, or kin-specific behaviour. Empirical studies testing the predictions of the theoretical models have only recently begun to emerge. This applies particularly to group decisions in fission-fusion societies, where individuals can avoid decisions that are not in their interest. After outlining the basic ideas and theoretical models on group decision-making I focus on the available empirical studies. Originally most of the relevant studies have been on social insects and fish but recently an increasing number of studies on mammals and birds have been published, including some that deal with wild long-lived animals living in complex societies. This includes societies where group members have different interests, as in most mammals, and which have been less studied compared to eusocial insects that normally have no conflict among their colony members about what to do. I investigate whether the same decision rules apply in societies with conflict and without conflict, and outline open questions that remain to be studied. The chapter concludes with a synthesis on what is known about group decision-making in animals and an outlook on what I think should be done to answer the open questions.
|
|
Parrish, J. K., & Viscido, S. V. (2005). Traffic rules of fish schools: A review of agent-based approaches. In C. K. Hemelrijk (Ed.), Self-organisation and the evolution of social behaviour. (pp. 50–80). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
