Dominance relations and agonistic behaviour of Tundra Swans (Cygnus columbianus columbianus) during fall and spring migration

2003 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 727-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon S Badzinski
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Dominance Hierarchy ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Agonistic Behaviour ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
Group Status ◽  
Cygnus Columbianus ◽  
Dominance Relations ◽  
Low Intensity ◽  
Simple Decision Rule

Social interactions and agonistic activities of Tundra Swans (Cygnus columbianus columbianus) were documented at Long Point, Ontario, to determine (i) dominance relations among social groups and (ii) the frequency and intensity of agonistic acts by swans. Families were involved in one-third as many interactions as were nonfamily groups. Nonfamily groups initiated interactions with other nonfamily groups more often than they did with family groups, but families initiated the same relative numbers of interactions with family and nonfamily groups. Further, families won nearly all conflicts with nonfamily groups, which suggests that they generally dominated nonfamily groups. Tundra Swans also showed a dominance hierarchy based largely on family or group size. To reduce conflict and energy expenditure, swans may use a simple "decision rule" during interactions: larger groups and initiators win. Two results supported this: (1) swans initiated interactions more often with smaller groups and (2) groups that initiated won interactions more often than did recipients. Swans used low-intensity agonistic acts more frequently than higher intensity ones when engaging members of other social groups, but intensity of aggression was independent of group status. Dominance based on the use of simple cues may be especially beneficial in unstable social environments at major staging areas.

Social Organization of Young Children's Groups: A Comparison of Two Models of Dominance Relations

1980 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 911-915 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel G. Frankel ◽  
Tali Arbel
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Social Organization ◽  
Social Interactions ◽  
Hierarchical Models ◽  
Dominance Hierarchy ◽  
Structural Characteristics ◽  
Strongly Correlated ◽  
Dominance Relations ◽  
Different Characteristics

The dominance hierarchy has provided a central construct for analyzing the organization of social interactions between young children. Hierarchies, though, constitute only one way of ordering dominance relations It is therefore possible that non-hierarchical orderings of dominance may suggest different characteristics of social organization. In the present study, dominance relations were evaluated with both hierarchical and non-hierarchical models. Across three groups of 2-yr.-olds, the hierarchical measure did not correlate with non-agonistic measures. The non-hierarchical measure of dominance relations, however, proved to be strongly correlated with the orderings for the non-agonistic behaviors. It was suggested that if dominance relations are used to evaluate social organization, the structural characteristics that may be attributed to a group of young children may depend upon the kind of measure that is used to analyze the dominance relations. Hierarchic and non-hierarchic measures of dominance relations may not imply identical properties of social organization.

scholarly journals Interactions between social groups of colobus monkeys (Colobus vellerosus) explain similarities in their gut microbiomes

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva Wikberg ◽  
Diana Christie ◽  
Pascale Sicotte ◽  
Nelson Ting
Keyword(s):  
Gut Microbiome ◽  
Social Connectedness ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Social Contact ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
Colobus Monkeys ◽  
Faecal Samples ◽  
Gut Microbe ◽  
Social Group Identity ◽  
Observation Period

AbstractThe gut microbiome is structured by social groups in a variety of host taxa. Whether this pattern is driven by relatedness, similar diets, or shared social environments is under debate because few studies have had access to the data necessary to disentangle these factors in wild populations. We investigated whether diet, relatedness, or the 1-meter proximity network best explains differences in the gut microbiome among 45 female colobus monkeys in 8 social groups residing at Boabeng-Fiema, Ghana. We combined demographic and behavioural data collected May-August 2007 and October 2008-April 2009 with 16S rRNA sequencing of faecal samples collected during the latter part of each observation period. Social group identity explained a large percentage of the variation in gut microbiome beta-diversity. When comparing the predictive power of dietary dissimilarity, relatedness, and connectedness in the 1-meter proximity network, the models with social connectedness received the strongest support, even in our analyses that excluded within-group dyads. This novel finding indicates that microbes may be transmitted during intergroup encounters, which could occur either indirectly via shared environments or directly via social contact. Lastly, some of the gut microbial taxa that appear to be transmitted via 1-meter proximity are associated with digestion of plant material, but further research is needed to investigate whether this type of gut microbe transmission yields health benefits, which could provide an incentive for the formation and maintenance of social bonds within and between social groups.

Divergent Systems of Agonistic Behaviour in Lemurid Primates

Behaviour ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 134 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 225-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael E. Pereira ◽  
Peter M. Kappeler
Keyword(s):  
Social Systems ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Agonistic Interaction ◽  
Agonistic Behaviour ◽  
Adult Males ◽  
Dominance Relations ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Ringtailed Lemurs

AbstractTwo semifree-ranging groups of ringtailed lemurs (Lemur catta) and two co-ranging groups of redfronted lemurs (Eulemur fulvus rufus) were studied across a two-year period to characterise and contrast the adult agonistic behaviour these primates exhibit within groups. Temporal analyses of behavioural data distinguished agonistic from non-agonistic behaviour and aggressive from submissive behaviour. The ringtailed lemurs employed a diverse repertoire of behavioural elements to communicate agonistic intent. More than 50% of these elements were signals and nearly 50% of signals were submissive. The agonistic repertoire of the redfronted lemurs, by contrast, was relatively unelaborated: less than 40% of agonistic behaviour in this species comprised signals and less than 20% of signals were submissive. These structural differences underlay marked species differences in agonistic interaction and relationship. All pairs of ringtailed lemurs maintained dominance relations resembling those seen in many anthropoid primates: subordinates consistently signalled submissively to dominant partners, often in the absence of aggression. Dominance relations among members of each sex were seasonally unstable and not always transitive (hierarchical) during periods of stability, however. Redfronted lemurs, by contrast, did not maintain dominance relations, failing to respond agonistically to most aggression received (52% of interactions) and responding with aggression on many other occasions (12%). Even applying relaxed criteria, few adult redfronted dyads (14%) showed consistent asymmetries in agonistic relations and several never exhibited any asymmetry. Lacking dominance, E. f rufus relied heavily on alternate behavioural mechanisms to moderate social conflict as frequent and intense as that seen in study groups of ringtailed lemurs. These included a great inclination not to respond agonistically to aggression, a distinctive behavioural proposal to limit or terminate dyadic conflict (Look away), post-conflict reconciliation, and relatively frequent third-party aggression. The existence of such divergent systems of agonistic behaviour in partially sympatric, closely related and generally similar prosimian primates offers important opportunities for comparative study of the ecology, development, and evolution of mammalian social systems. Future research may reveal ecophysiological factors that promote the use of dominance behaviour among like-sexed ringtailed lemurs and show how the relative absence of dominance relates to other major elements of redfronted lemur biology, including 'special relationships' of variable duration between adult males and females.

Social Organisation and Warren Use of the Burrowing Bettong, Bettongia lesueur (Macropodoidea : Potoroidae)

1997 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ute Sander ◽  
Jeff Short ◽  
Bruce Turner
Keyword(s):  
Dominance Hierarchy ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Young Male ◽  
Social Organisation ◽  
Agonistic Interactions ◽  
Weak Dominance ◽  
Shark Bay ◽  
Day Range ◽  
The Social ◽  
Polygynous Mating System

This study describes the use of warrens and aspects of the social organisation of a population of the burrowing bettong, an endangered potoroid. Observations were made on 14 animals, maintained in a 4-ha enclosure of natural vegetation at Shark Bay, Western Australia. The population divided into three social groups, each of one male and one to many females. Individual bettongs used 1–10 warrens over a period of five months. Males changed warrens more often than females. Some females regularly shared warrens with other females. Many of these associations appeared to be mothers with their daughter or daughters. Sharing of warrens occurred regularly until the daughters were about 10 months old and occasionally after that. Day ranges of males were larger than those of females, exclusive of other males, and overlapped those of 1–6 females. Males shared warrens with the females within their day range. At night bettongs were not constrained to their day range and made use of the whole enclosure. Equal numbers of agonistic interactions between and within day-range groups, as well as the absence of feeding associations, indicated that bettongs operated independently of their day-range groups at night while feeding. Bettongs formed a weak dominance hierarchy with the oldest female on top and a young male at the bottom. Male–male interactions tended to be more aggressive than male–female interactions. Males were involved in significantly more agonistic interactions, particularly chases, than were females; chases usually entailed chasing another male away from a female. Use of space and social behaviour suggested a polygynous mating system.

scholarly journals How does cognition shape social relationships?

2018 ◽  
Vol 373 (1756) ◽  
pp. 20170293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia A. F. Wascher ◽  
Ipek G. Kulahci ◽  
Ellis J. G. Langley ◽  
Rachael C. Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Social Relationships ◽  
Individual Variation ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Cognitive Skills ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Theme Issue ◽  
The Social ◽  
Evolutionary Consequences

The requirements of living in social groups, and forming and maintaining social relationships are hypothesized to be one of the major drivers behind the evolution of cognitive abilities. Most empirical studies investigating the relationships between sociality and cognition compare cognitive performance between species living in systems that differ in social complexity. In this review, we ask whether and how individuals benefit from cognitive skills in their social interactions. Cognitive abilities, such as perception, attention, learning, memory, and inhibitory control, aid in forming and maintaining social relationships. We investigate whether there is evidence that individual variation in these abilities influences individual variation in social relationships. We then consider the evolutionary consequences of the interaction between sociality and cognitive ability to address whether bi-directional relationships exist between the two, such that cognition can both shape and be shaped by social interactions and the social environment. In doing so, we suggest that social network analysis is emerging as a powerful tool that can be used to test for directional causal relationships between sociality and cognition. Overall, our review highlights the importance of investigating individual variation in cognition to understand how it shapes the patterns of social relationships. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Causes and consequences of individual differences in cognitive abilities’.

Refugees and Diasporas

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tenzin Dorjee
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Identity Negotiation ◽  
Social Identities ◽  
Diaspora Studies ◽  
Theoretical Discussion ◽  
Intergroup Communication ◽  
Immigrant Studies ◽  
Social Identity Complexity ◽  
Scholarly Attention

Refugees and diasporas are part and parcel of today’s accelerating global diversity and domestic diversity changes that we encounter in social interactions. These terms conjure up images in our mind of individuals who belong to certain social groups in host environments. Basically, their social identities define who they are and how they are treated by others in social interactions. While there is extensive research on refugees and diasporas in three separate but interrelated domains—refugee studies, diaspora studies, and immigrant studies, less scholarly attention has been paid to the conceptual distinctions between refugees and diasporas, among other things. The complexity of refugees and diasporas is explored along with some implications. Most studies are atheoretical in nature, and an intergroup perspective can provide insights into how they engage in identity negotiation and intergroup communication adaptation to host environments. Thus, a theoretical discussion is provided of how refugees and diasporas face the challenges to preserve, maintain, and further their distinctive social identities, and also adapt to the new environment by way of negotiating their social identity complexity using intergroup communication strategies.

Power and punishment influence negotiations over parental care

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 911-921 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina A Barbasch ◽  
Suzanne H Alonzo ◽  
Peter M Buston
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Behavioral Response ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
The Other ◽  
Reproductive Conflict ◽  
Negotiation Model ◽  
Rank 2 ◽  
Evolutionary Consequences ◽  
Total Effort ◽  
Partial Compensation

Abstract Asymmetries in power (the ability to influence the outcome of conflict) are ubiquitous in social interactions because interacting individuals are rarely identical. It is well documented that asymmetries in power influence the outcome of reproductive conflict in social groups. Yet power asymmetries have received little attention in the context of negotiations between caring parents, which is surprising given that parents are often markedly different in size. Here we built on an existing negotiation model to examine how power and punishment influence negotiations over care. We incorporated power asymmetry by allowing the more-powerful parent, rank 1, to inflict punishment on the less-powerful parent, rank 2. We then determined when punishment will be favored by selection and how it would affect the negotiated behavioral response of each parent. We found that with power and punishment, a reduction in one parent’s effort results in partial compensation by the other parent. However, the degree of compensation is asymmetric: the rank 2 compensates more than the rank 1. As a result, the fitness of rank 1 increases and the fitness of rank 2 decreases, relative to the original negotiation model. Furthermore, because power and punishment enable one parent to extract greater effort from the other, offspring can do better, that is, receive more total effort, when there is power and punishment involved in negotiations over care. These results reveal how power and punishment alter the outcome of conflict between parents and affect offspring, providing insights into the evolutionary consequences of exerting power in negotiations.

scholarly journals The role of self–other distinction in understanding others' mental and emotional states: neurocognitive mechanisms in children and adults

2016 ◽  
Vol 371 (1686) ◽  
pp. 20150074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolaus Steinbeis
Keyword(s):  
Social Interactions ◽  
Fundamental Problem ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Neural Circuitry ◽  
Developmental Changes ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
Affective States ◽  
Affective Domains

Social interactions come with the fundamental problem of trying to understand others' mental and affective states while under the overpowering influence of one's own concurrent thoughts and feelings. The ability to distinguish between simultaneous representations of others' current experiences as well as our own is crucial to navigate our complex social environments successfully. The developmental building blocks of this ability and how this is given rise to by functional and structural brain development remains poorly understood. In this review, I outline some of the key findings on the role of self–other distinction in understanding others' mental as well as emotional states in children and adults. I will begin by clarifying the crucial role for self–other distinction in avoiding egocentric attributions of one's own cognitive as well as affective states to others in adults and outline the underlying neural circuitry in overcoming such egocentricity. This will provide the basis for a discussion of the emergence of self–other distinction in early childhood as well as developmental changes therein throughout childhood and into adulthood. I will demonstrate that self–other distinction of cognitive and emotional states is already dissociable early in development. Concomitantly, I will show that processes of self–other distinction in cognitive and affective domains rely on adjacent but distinct neural circuitry each with unique connectivity profiles, presumably related to the nature of the distinction that needs to be made.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document