Literature DB >> 11124869

Theory and method in studies of vigilance and aggregation.

.   

Abstract

Predation is considered one of the most important selective pressures on free-ranging animals. Our understanding of it derives mainly from studies of individual vigilance (visual scanning of the surroundings beyond the immediate vicinity) and aggregation in prey. Vigilance bears a direct relationship to aggregation, because animals in groups may rely on associates for early warning of danger. This review addresses the relationship between vigilance and aggregation with particular attention to the prediction that individual vigilance declines with increasing group size. Contrary to most other animals studied, primates do not support the prediction. Exploring this, I examined the assumptions underlying vigilance theory in the light of primate behaviour. First I tested whether manual harvesting and upright processing of food as seen among primates might permit them to feed and scan simultaneously. I found no support for this idea. Next I examined the targets of primate vigilance and found that one component (within-group vigilance) might explain the differences between primates and other animals. Finally, I evaluated whether individual primates in large groups face a lower risk of predation than those in small groups. A conclusion was impossible, but by separating group-level from individual-level risk, I was able to identify several common circumstances in which group size would not predict individual risk or vigilance. These circumstances arose for primates and nonprimates alike. I concluded that the relationship of vigilance to aggregation is not straightforward. The absence of a group-size effect on vigilance among primates is probably due to functional differences in vigilance behaviour or safety in groups, not to methodological differences. Furthermore, future work on animal vigilance and aggregation must fully consider both the targets of glances, and the assumption that larger groups are safer from predators. I predict that animals will not relax vigilance in larger groups if conspecific threat increases with group size. Group size will not predict individual risk of predation nor individual vigilance rates when predators do not rely on surprise, or when predators select a small subset of highly vulnerable group members. Copyright 2000 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Year:  2000        PMID: 11124869     DOI: 10.1006/anbe.2000.1528

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Behav        ISSN: 0003-3472            Impact factor:   2.844


  32 in total

1.  Look before you leap - individual variation in social vigilance shapes socio-spatial group properties in an agent-based model.

Authors:  Ellen Evers; Han de Vries; Berry M Spruijt; Elisabeth H M Sterck
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Risk allocation and competition in foraging groups: reversed effects of competition if group size varies under risk of predation.

Authors:  Peter A Bednekoff; Steven L Lima
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-07-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  A simple rule for the costs of vigilance: empirical evidence from a social forager.

Authors:  Guy Cowlishaw; Michael J Lawes; Margaret Lightbody; Alison Martin; Richard Pettifor; J Marcus Rowcliffe
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Individuals in foraging groups may use vocal cues when assessing their need for anti-predator vigilance.

Authors:  Andrew N Radford; Amanda R Ridley
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2007-06-22       Impact factor: 3.703

5.  Interactions among social monitoring, anti-predator vigilance and group size in eastern grey kangaroos.

Authors:  François-René Favreau; Anne W Goldizen; Olivier Pays
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-03-10       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Synchronized practice helps bearded capuchin monkeys learn to extend attention while learning a tradition.

Authors:  Dorothy M Fragaszy; Yonat Eshchar; Elisabetta Visalberghi; Briseida Resende; Kellie Laity; Patrícia Izar
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-07-24       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Genetic influences on social attention in free-ranging rhesus macaques.

Authors:  K K Watson; D Li; L J N Brent; J E Horvath; J Gonzalez-Martinez; Ruiz-A Lambides; A G Robinson; J H P Skene; M L Platt
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 2.844

8.  Navigating two-dimensional mazes: chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and capuchins (Cebus apella sp.) profit from experience differently.

Authors:  Dorothy M Fragaszy; Erica Kennedy; Aeneas Murnane; Charles Menzel; Gene Brewer; Julie Johnson-Pynn; William Hopkins
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2009-01-16       Impact factor: 3.084

9.  Vigilance in a Cooperatively Breeding Primate.

Authors:  Mojca Stojan-Dolar; Eckhard W Heymann
Journal:  Int J Primatol       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 2.264

10.  Hawk eyes II: diurnal raptors differ in head movement strategies when scanning from perches.

Authors:  Colleen T O'Rourke; Todd Pitlik; Melissa Hoover; Esteban Fernández-Juricic
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-09-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.