Romero, T., & Aureli, F. (2008). Reciprocity of support in coatis (Nasua nasua). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 122(1), 19–25.
Abstract: Primate sociality has received much attention and its complexity has been viewed as a driving force for the evolution of cognitive abilities. Improved analytic techniques have allowed primate researchers to reveal intricate social networks based on the exchange of cooperative acts and services. Although nonprimates are known to show similar behavior (e.g., cooperative hunting, food sharing, coalitions) there seems a consensus that social life is less complex than in primates. Here the authors present the first group-level analysis of reciprocity of social interactions in a social carnivore, the ring-tailed coati (<xh:i xmlns:search=“http://marklogic.com/appservices/search” xmlns=“http://apa.org/pimain” xmlns:xsi=“http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance” xmlns:xh=“http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml”>Nasua nasua</xh:i>). The authors found that support in aggressive conflicts is a common feature in coatis and that this behavior is reciprocally exchanged in a manner seemingly as complex as in primates. Given that reciprocity correlations persisted after controlling for the effect of spatial association and subunit membership, some level of scorekeeping may be involved. Further studies will be needed to confirm our findings and understand the mechanisms underlying such reciprocity, but our results contribute to the body of work that has begun to challenge primate supremacy in social complexity and cognition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
|
|
Nakagawa, S., & Waas, J. R. (2004). 'O sibling, where art thou?' – A review of avian sibling recognition with respect to the mammalian literature. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 79(1), 101–119.
Abstract: Avian literature on sibling recognition is rare compared to that developed by mammalian researchers. We compare avian and mammalian research on sibling recognition to identify why avian work is rare, how approaches differ and what avian and mammalian researchers can learn from each other. Three factors: (1) biological differences between birds and mammals, (2) conceptual biases and (3) practical constraints, appear to influence our current understanding. Avian research focuses on colonial species because sibling recognition is considered adaptive where 'mixing potential' of dependent young is high; research on a wider range of species, breeding systems and ecological conditions is now needed. Studies of acoustic recognition cues dominate avian literature; other types of cues (e.g. visual, olfactory) deserve further attention. The effect of gender on avian sibling recognition has yet to be investigated; mammalian work shows that gender can have important influences. Most importantly, many researchers assume that birds recognise siblings through 'direct familiarisation' (commonly known as associative learning or familiarity); future experiments should also incorporate tests for 'indirect familiarisation' (commonly known as phenotype matching). If direct familiarisation proves crucial, avian research should investigate how periods of separation influence sibling discrimination. Mammalian researchers typically interpret sibling recognition in broad functional terms (nepotism, optimal outbreeding); some avian researchers more successfully identify specific and testable adaptive explanations, with greater relevance to natural contexts. We end by reporting exciting discoveries from recent studies of avian sibling recognition that inspire further interest in this topic.
|
|
Apfelbach, R., Blanchard, C. D., Blanchard, R. J., Hayes, R. A., & McGregor, I. S. (2005). The effects of predator odors in mammalian prey species: A review of field and laboratory studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 29(8), 1123–1144.
Abstract: Prey species show specific adaptations that allow recognition, avoidance and defense against predators. For many mammalian species this includes sensitivity towards predator-derived odors. The typical sources of such odors include predator skin and fur, urine, feces and anal gland secretions. Avoidance of predator odors has been observed in many mammalian prey species including rats, mice, voles, deer, rabbits, gophers, hedgehogs, possums and sheep. Field and laboratory studies show that predator odors have distinctive behavioral effects which include (1) inhibition of activity, (2) suppression of non-defensive behaviors such as foraging, feeding and grooming, and (3) shifts to habitats or secure locations where such odors are not present. The repellent effect of predator odors in the field may sometimes be of practical use in the protection of crops and natural resources, although not all attempts at this have been successful. The failure of some studies to obtain repellent effects with predator odors may relate to (1) mismatches between the predator odors and prey species employed, (2) strain and individual differences in sensitivity to predator odors, and (3) the use of predator odors that have low efficacy. In this regard, a small number of recent studies have suggested that skin and fur-derived predator odors may have a more profound lasting effect on prey species than those derived from urine or feces. Predator odors can have powerful effects on the endocrine system including a suppression of testosterone and increased levels of stress hormones such as corticosterone and ACTH. Inhibitory effects of predator odors on reproductive behavior have been demonstrated, and these are particularly prevalent in female rodent species. Pregnant female rodents exposed to predator odors may give birth to smaller litters while exposure to predator odors during early life can hinder normal development. Recent research is starting to uncover the neural circuitry activated by predator odors, leading to hypotheses about how such activation leads to observable effects on reproduction, foraging and feeding. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
Palme, R., Rettenbacher, S., Touma, C., El-Bahr, S. M., & Mostl, E. (2005). Stress hormones in mammals and birds: comparative aspects regarding metabolism, excretion, and noninvasive measurement in fecal samples. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1040, 162–171.
Abstract: A multitude of endocrine mechanisms are involved in coping with challenges. Front-line hormones to overcome stressful situations are glucocorticoids (GCs) and catecholamines (CAs). These hormones are usually determined in plasma samples as parameters of adrenal activity and thus of disturbance. GCs (and CAs) are extensively metabolized and excreted afterwards. Therefore, the concentration of GCs (or their metabolites) can be measured in various body fluids or excreta. Above all, fecal samples offer the advantages of easy collection and a feedback-free sampling procedure. However, large differences exist among species regarding the route and time course of excretion, as well as the types of metabolites formed. Based on information gained from radiometabolism studies (reviewed in this paper), we recently developed and successfully validated different enzyme immunoassays that enable the noninvasive measurement of groups of cortisol or corticosterone metabolites in animal feces. The determination of these metabolites in fecal samples can be used as a powerful tool to monitor GC production in various species of domestic, wildlife, and laboratory animals.
|
|
Touma, C., & Palme, R. (2005). Measuring fecal glucocorticoid metabolites in mammals and birds: the importance of validation. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1046, 54–74.
Abstract: In recent years, the noninvasive monitoring of steroid hormone metabolites in feces of mammals and droppings of birds has become an increasingly popular technique. It offers several advantages and has been applied to a variety of species under various settings. However, using this technique to reliably assess an animal's adrenocortical activity is not that simple and straightforward to apply. Because clear differences regarding the metabolism and excretion of glucocorticoid metabolites (GCMs) exist, a careful validation for each species and sex investigated is obligatory. In this review, general analytical issues regarding sample storage, extraction procedures, and immunoassays are briefly discussed, but the main focus lies on experiments and recommendations addressing the validation of fecal GCM measurements in mammals and birds. The crucial importance of scrutinizing the physiological and biological validity of fecal GCM analyses in a given species is stressed. In particular, the relevance of the technique to detect biologically meaningful alterations in adrenocortical activity must be shown. Furthermore, significant effects of the animals' sex, the time of day, season, and different life history stages are discussed, bringing about the necessity to seriously consider possible sex differences as well as diurnal and seasonal variations. Thus, comprehensive information on the animals' biology and stress physiology should be carefully taken into account. Together with an extensive physiological and biological validation, this will ensure that the measurement of fecal GCMs can be used as a powerful tool to assess adrenocortical activity in diverse investigations on laboratory, companion, farm, zoo, and wild animals.
|
|