[ad_1]
According to new research involving the University of Plymouth, animal groups consider multiple factors before deciding whether to fight rivals.
Before one-on-one fights, animals are known to make decisions based on factors including the size and strength of the opponent, the outcome of recent fights, and the importance of the prize.
But scientists from the universities of Plymouth and Exeter say previous research has often overlooked complexity in group conflicts and speculated that larger groups will always win.
Instead, they say that factors like group cohesion and teamwork, strength of individual members, and battle location likely play a role – and animal groups assess the situation before fighting.
The research, published in Trends in Ecology and Evolution, was funded by the Human Frontiers Science Program and the Natural Environment Research Council.
Co-author Mark Briffa, professor of animal behavior at the University of Plymouth, said:
“Researchers have spent years wondering to what extent individual combat animals use ‘evaluation’ – effectively, evaluating their opponent. In this article, we explore the possibility for groups of rivals to do a similar thing.
“This could be a possibility in many examples across the animal kingdom where individuals work collectively, such as battles between rival ant groups or even wars between rival groups in humans.”
Struggles between social groups are common in nature and it is often assumed that groups with multiple members are the likely winners of any fight.
Previous animal studies including primates, lions, birds and ants show this is often correct, however, current research highlights other factors that may play a role:
- Strong individuals: among gray wolves, smaller groups with more males – who are larger and stronger than females – can outperform larger groups;
- Motivation: Meerkat groups containing pups may win despite lower numbers – suggesting a “motivational advantage” because gaining new territory can lead to more food for their young;
- Chances of Winning: Studies of turtle ants, which have multiple nests, suggest they prioritize defending those with narrower entrances, as larger entrances are more difficult to defend. This allows them to successfully defend some parts of their territory;
- Winner / Loser Effect ”: Losers of baboon intergroup conflicts spend less time in the area where the fight occurred than before the fight, suggesting avoiding areas where they had previously lost;
- Social Cohesion: In months when they have a lot of fighting between groups, social groups of chimpanzees are more cohesive and males are less aggressive within the group, suggesting that cohesion can be helpful at times when fighting is likely.
Lead author, Dr Patrick Green, of the Center for Ecology and Conservation at the University of Exeter, said:
“Any potential combat, whether between humans or animals, becomes more complex if there are more individuals on all sides. Groups can evaluate both the importance of whatever they are fighting over and a number of factors about their group and the opponent.
“Research on dyadic (one-on-one) fighting has developed an advanced framework on ‘assessment’ – how animals gather information and decide whether to fight, how much effort to make and if and when to give up. However, studies of group competitions among social animals have generally not focused on evaluation. Understanding more about this can teach us not only about evolution, but also about conflict in human beings. “
The full study – Green et al: Assessments during Intergroup Contests – is published in Trends in Ecology and Evolution, doi: 10.1016 / j.tree.2020.09.007.
.
[ad_2]
Source link
