|
|
Beaver, B. V. (1981). Problems & values associated with dominance. Vet Med Small Anim Clin, 76(8), 1129–1131.
|
|
|
|
Biro, D., Sumpter, D. J. T., Meade, J., & Guilford, T. (2006). From Compromise to Leadership in Pigeon Homing. Curr Biol, 16(21), 2123–2128.
Abstract: Summary A central problem faced by animals traveling in groups is how navigational decisions by group members are integrated, especially when members cannot assess which individuals are best informed or have conflicting information or interests , , , and . Pigeons are now known to recapitulate faithfully their individually distinct habitual routes home , and , and this provides a novel paradigm for investigating collective decisions during flight under varying levels of interindividual conflict. Using high-precision GPS tracking of pairs of pigeons, we found that if conflict between two birds' directional preferences was small, individuals averaged their routes, whereas if conflict rose over a critical threshold, either the pair split or one of the birds became the leader. Modeling such paired decision-making showed that both outcomes--compromise and leadership--could emerge from the same set of simple behavioral rules. Pairs also navigated more efficiently than did the individuals of which they were composed, even though leadership was not necessarily assumed by the more efficient bird. In the context of mass migration of birds and other animals, our results imply that simple self-organizing rules can produce behaviors that improve accuracy in decision-making and thus benefit individuals traveling in groups , and .
|
|
|
|
Broom, M. (2002). A unified model of dominance hierarchy formation and maintenance. J. Theor. Biol., 219(1), 63–72.
Abstract: In many different species it is common for animals to spend large portions of their lives in groups. Such groups need to divide available resources amongst the individuals they contain and this is often achieved by means of a dominance hierarchy. Sometimes hierarchies are stable over a long period of time and new individuals slot into pre-determined positions, but there are many situations where this is not so and a hierarchy is formed out of a group of individuals meeting for the first time. There are several different models both of the formation of such dominance hierarchies and of already existing hierarchies. These models often treat the two phases as entirely separate, whereas in reality, if there is a genuine formation phase to the hierarchy, behaviour in this phase will be governed by the rewards available, which in turn depends upon how the hierarchy operates once it has been formed. This paper describes a method of unifying models of these two distinct phases, assuming that the hierarchy formed is stable. In particular a framework is introduced which allows a variety of different models of each of the two parts to be used in conjunction with each other, thus enabling a wide range of situations to be modelled. Some examples are given to show how this works in practice.
|
|
|
|
Chase, I. D., Tovey, C., Spangler-Martin, D., & Manfredonia, M. (2002). Individual differences versus social dynamics in the formation of animal dominance hierarchies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 99(8), 5744–5749.
Abstract: Linear hierarchies, the classical pecking-order structures, are formed readily in both nature and the laboratory in a great range of species including humans. However, the probability of getting linear structures by chance alone is quite low. In this paper we investigate the two hypotheses that are proposed most often to explain linear hierarchies: they are predetermined by differences in the attributes of animals, or they are produced by the dynamics of social interaction, i.e., they are self-organizing. We evaluate these hypotheses using cichlid fish as model animals, and although differences in attributes play a significant part, we find that social interaction is necessary for high proportions of groups with linear hierarchies. Our results suggest that dominance hierarchy formation is a much richer and more complex phenomenon than previously thought, and we explore the implications of these results for evolutionary biology, the social sciences, and the use of animal models in understanding human social organization.
|
|
|
|
Clutton-Brock, T. H., Greenwood, P. J., & Powell, R. P. (1976). Ranks and relationships in Highland ponies and Highland Cows. Z. Tierpsychol., 41(2), 202–216.
Abstract: Recent studies of primates have questioned the importance of dominance hierarchies in groups living under natural conditions. In a herd of Highland ponies and one of Highland cattle grazing under free-range conditions on the Isle of Rhum (Inner Hebrides) well defined hierarchies were present. The provision of food produced a marked increase in the frequency of agonistic interactions but had no effect on the rank systems of the two herds. While rank was clearly important in affecting the distribution of agonistic interactions, it was poorly related to behaviour in non-agonistic situations.
|
|
|
|
Craig, J. V. (1986). Measuring social behavior: social dominance. J. Anim Sci., 62(4), 1120–1129.
Abstract: Social dominance develops more slowly when young animals are kept in intact peer groups where they need not compete for resources. Learned generalizations may cause smaller and weaker animals to accept subordinate status readily when confronted with strangers that would be formidable opponents. Sexual hormones and sensitivity to them can influence the onset of aggression and status attained. After dominance orders are established, they tend to be stable in female groups but are less so in male groups. Psychological influences can affect dominance relationships when strangers meet and social alliances within groups may affect relative status of individuals. Whether status associated with agonistic behavior is correlated with control of space and scarce resources needs to be determined for each species and each kind of resource. When such correlations exists, competitive tests and agonistic behavior associated with gaining access to scarce resources can be useful to the observer in learning about dominance relationships rapidly. Examples are given to illustrate how estimates of social dominance can be readily attained and some strengths and weaknesses of the various methods.
|
|
|
|
de Waal, F. B. (1986). The integration of dominance and social bonding in primates. Q Rev Biol, 61(4), 459–479.
Abstract: Social dominance is usually viewed from the perspective of intragroup competition over access to limited resources. The present paper, while not denying the importance of such competition, discusses the dominance concept among monkeys and apes in the context of affiliative bonding, social tolerance, and the reconciliation of aggressive conflicts. Two basic proximate mechanisms are supposed to provide a link between dominance and interindividual affiliation, namely, formalization of the dominance relationship (i.e., unequivocal communication of status), and conditional reassurance (i.e., the linkage of friendly coexistence to formalization of the relationship). Ritualized submission is imposed upon losers of dominance struggles by winners; losers are offered a “choice” between continued hostility or a tolerant relationship with a clearly signalled difference in status. If these two social mechanisms are lacking, aggression is bound to have dispersive effects. In their presence, aggression becomes a well-integrated, even constructive component of social life. In some higher primates this process of integration has reached the stage where status differences are strongly attenuated. In these species, sharing and trading can take the place of overt competition. The views underlying this “reconciled hierarchy” model are only partly new, as is evident from a review of the ethological literature. Many points are illustrated with data on a large semi-captive colony of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), particularly data related to striving for status, reconciliation behavior, and general association patterns. These observations demonstrate that relationships among adult male chimpanzees cannot be described in terms of a dichotomy between affiliative and antagonistic tendencies. Male bonding in this species has not been achieved by an elimination of aggression, but by a set of powerful buffering mechanisms that mitigate its effects. Although female chimpanzees do exhibit a potential for bonding under noncompetitive conditions, they appear to lack the buffering mechanisms of the males.
|
|
|
|
Dunbar, R. I., & Dunbar, E. P. (1976). Contrasts in social structure among black-and-white colobus monkey groups. Anim. Behav., 24(1), 84–92.
Abstract: Three types of Colobus guereza groups may be distinguished on the bases of size and composition, namely small one-male groups, large, one-male groups and multi-male groups. The social structure of each type of group is described in terms of the distribution of non-agonistic interactions, the frequency and distribution of agonistic behaviour and the organization of the roles of vigilance, territorial defence and leadership. A number of differences are found between the group types which appear to be related to the differences in group size and composition. It is suggested that these group types represent stages in the life-cycle of colobus groups, and that such an interpretation may help to resolve some of the conflicting reports in the literature.
|
|
|
|
Edwards, D. H., & Spitzer, N. (2006). 6. Social dominance and serotonin receptor genes in crayfish. Curr Top Dev Biol, 74, 177–199.
Abstract: Gene expression affects social behavior only through changes in the excitabilities of neural circuits that govern the release of the relevant motor programs. In turn, social behavior affects gene expression only through patterns of sensory stimulation that produce significant activation of relevant portions of the nervous system. In crayfish, social interactions between pairs of animals lead to changes in behavior that mark the formation of a dominance hierarchy. Those changes in behavior result from changes in the excitability of specific neural circuits. In the new subordinate, circuits for offensive behavior become less excitable and those for defensive behavior become more excitable. Serotonin, which is implicated in mechanisms for social dominance in many animals, modulates circuits for escape and avoidance responses in crayfish. The modulatory effects of serotonin on the escape circuits have been found to change with social dominance, becoming excitatory in dominant crayfish and inhibitory in subordinates. These changes in serotonin's effects on escape affect the synaptic response to sensory input of a single cell, the lateral giant (LG) command neuron for escape. Moreover, these changes occur over a 2-week period and for the subordinate are reversible at any time following a reversal of the animal's status. The results have suggested that a persistent change in social status leads to a gradual change in the expression of serotonin receptors to a pattern that is more appropriate for the new status. To test that hypothesis, the expression patterns of crayfish serotonin receptors must be compared in dominant and subordinate animals. Two of potentially five serotonin receptors in crayfish have been cloned, sequenced, and pharmacologically characterized. Measurements of receptor expression in the whole CNS of dominant and subordinate crayfish have produced inconclusive results, probably because each receptor is widespread in the nervous system and is likely to experience opposite expression changes in different areas of the CNS. Both receptors have recently been found in identified neurons that mediate escape responses, and so the next step will be to measure their expression in these identified cells in dominant and subordinate animals.
|
|
|
|
Grosenick, L., Clement, T. S., & Fernald, R. D. (2007). Fish can infer social rank by observation alone. Nature, 445(7126), 429–432.
Abstract: Transitive inference (TI) involves using known relationships to deduce unknown ones (for example, using A > B and B > C to infer A > C), and is thus essential to logical reasoning. First described as a developmental milestone in children, TI has since been reported in nonhuman primates, rats and birds. Still, how animals acquire and represent transitive relationships and why such abilities might have evolved remain open problems. Here we show that male fish (Astatotilapia burtoni) can successfully make inferences on a hierarchy implied by pairwise fights between rival males. These fish learned the implied hierarchy vicariously (as 'bystanders'), by watching fights between rivals arranged around them in separate tank units. Our findings show that fish use TI when trained on socially relevant stimuli, and that they can make such inferences by using indirect information alone. Further, these bystanders seem to have both spatial and featural representations related to rival abilities, which they can use to make correct inferences depending on what kind of information is available to them. Beyond extending TI to fish and experimentally demonstrating indirect TI learning in animals, these results indicate that a universal mechanism underlying TI is unlikely. Rather, animals probably use multiple domain-specific representations adapted to different social and ecological pressures that they encounter during the course of their natural lives.
|
|
