|
|
Pusey, A. E. (1987). Sex-biased dispersal and inbreeding avoidance in birds and mammals. Trends. Ecol. Evol, 2(10), 295–299.
Abstract: Sex differences in dispersal distance are widespread in birds and mammals, but the predominantly dispersing sex differs consistently between the classes. There has been persistent debate over the relative importance of two factors -- intrasexual competition and inbreeding avoidance -- in producing sex-biased dispersal, and over the sources of the difference in dispersal patterns between the two classes. Recent studies cast new light on these questions.
|
|
|
|
Karenina, K., Giljov, A., Ingram, J., Rowntree, V. J., & Malashichev, Y. (2017). Lateralization of mother�infant interactions in a diverse range of mammal species. Nat Ecol Evol, 1, 0030 Ep -.
Abstract: Left-cradling bias is a distinctive feature of maternal behaviour in humans and great apes, but its evolutionary origin remains unknown. In 11 species of marine and terrestrial mammal, we demonstrate consistent patterns of lateralization in mother�infant interactions, indicating right hemisphere dominance for social processing. In providing clear evidence that lateralized positioning is beneficial in mother�infant interactions, our results illustrate a significant impact of lateralization on individual fitness.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
