Literature DB >> 18811295

Mutualism among safe, selfish sentinels: a dynamic game.

P A Bednekoff1.   

Abstract

Sentinels are group members that watch from prominent positions. Sentinel interchanges often appear orderly, and groups with sentinels rarely have zero or many sentinels. A dynamic game was constructed to examine if these observations about sentinels could be based on selfish actions by individual group members. In this game, each group member chose to forage or be a sentinel based on its own energetic state and the actions of others. Sentinels received a selfish antipredator benefit if their ability to detect approaching predators more than compensated for their increased exposure to undetected predators. Provided sentinels were relatively safe and that detection information spread to other group members when sentinels detected predators, sentinels appeared highly coordinated for all combinations of parameters. This apparent coordination was based on mutualism because each individual gained by being a sentinel when other group members were not (and foraging when other group members were being sentinels). The model was very robust, but exact level of sentinel behavior varied somewhat with changes in foraging and predation parameters. This model could best be tested by testing its assumptions about sentinel safety, foraging-predation trade-offs, and information transfer in groups.

Year:  1997        PMID: 18811295     DOI: 10.1086/286070

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Nat        ISSN: 0003-0147            Impact factor:   3.926


  16 in total

1.  Negotiating a stable solution for vigilance behaviour.

Authors:  Andrew N Radford; Tim W Fawcett
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Bargaining babblers: vocal negotiation of cooperative behaviour in a social bird.

Authors:  M B V Bell; A N Radford; R A Smith; A M Thompson; A R Ridley
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-06-02       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Endogenous timing in competitive interactions among relatives.

Authors:  Michael A Cant; Sheng-Feng Shen
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-01-22       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Prey synchronize their vigilant behaviour with other group members.

Authors:  Olivier Pays; Pierre-Cyril Renaud; Patrice Loisel; Maud Petit; Jean-François Gerard; Peter J Jarman
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-05-22       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  The value of constant surveillance in a risky environment.

Authors:  M B V Bell; A N Radford; R Rose; H M Wade; A R Ridley
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-06-03       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  The higher the better: sentinel height influences foraging success in a social bird.

Authors:  Andrew N Radford; Linda I Hollén; Matthew B V Bell
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Experimental evidence that sentinel behaviour is affected by risk.

Authors:  A R Ridley; N J Raihani; M B V Bell
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2010-02-24       Impact factor: 3.703

8.  Familiarity breeds contempt: kangaroos persistently avoid areas with experimentally deployed dingo scents.

Authors:  Michael H Parsons; Daniel T Blumstein
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Calling by concluding sentinels: coordinating cooperation or revealing risk?

Authors:  Linda I Hollén; Matthew B V Bell; Alexis Russell; Fraser Niven; Amanda R Ridley; Andrew N Radford
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-10-03       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Mortality rates and division of labor in the leaf-cutting ant, Atta colombica.

Authors:  Mark J F Brown; A N M Bot; Adam G Hart
Journal:  J Insect Sci       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 1.857

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.