Abstract
Coordination can greatly improve the efficiency of anti-predatory vigilance scans by increasing predator detection for a constant proportion of time spent vigilant. However, it has been rarely found in nature and most studies have detected or assumed independent scanning by group members. In this study, we analysed the functional consequences of the coordinated alternation of vigilance scanning by group foragers. We introduce coordination by assuming that interscan intervals (ISIs) follow a modified gamma distribution. Depending on the parameters of the distribution, successive scans can be evenly spaced (coordinated scanning) or may present a high overlap (uncoordinated scanning). Comparing evolutionarily stable strategies for animals that do not coordinate their scanning with animals that do coordinate their anti-predator behaviour shows that coordination has a marked effect on survival probability. Moreover, the coordinating strategy is quite robust against mutants that scan independently with exponential distributions of ISIs. However, coordination breaks down when animals can continuously adjust their level of coordination by deciding the proportion of time they spend monitoring the behaviour of other group members. In this case, coordination is only evolutionarily stable if it can be very easily achieved.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (165.0 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Bahr DB, Bekoff M. Predicting flock vigilance from simple passerine interactions: modelling with cellular automata. Anim Behav. 1999 Oct;58(4):831–839. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1999.1227. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Boyd R., Richerson P. J. The evolution of reciprocity in sizable groups. J Theor Biol. 1988 Jun 7;132(3):337–356. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5193(88)80219-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Clutton-Brock T. H., O'Riain M. J., Brotherton P. N., Gaynor D., Kansky R., Griffin A. S., Manser M. Selfish sentinels in cooperative mammals. Science. 1999 Jun 4;284(5420):1640–1644. doi: 10.1126/science.284.5420.1640. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ferrière R, Cazelles B, Cézilly F, Desportes JP. Predictability, chaos and coordination in bird vigilant behaviour. Anim Behav. 1999 Feb;57(2):497–500. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0966. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Gibbon J., Church R. M., Meck W. H. Scalar timing in memory. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1984;423:52–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1984.tb23417.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lima SL, Bednekoff PA. Back to the basics of antipredatory vigilance: can nonvigilant animals detect attack? Anim Behav. 1999 Sep;58(3):537–543. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1999.1182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pulliam H. R. On the advantages of flocking. J Theor Biol. 1973 Feb;38(2):419–422. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(73)90184-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rodríguez-Gironés M. A., Kacelnik A. Relative importance of perceptual and mnemonic variance in human temporal bisection. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2001 May;54(2):527–546. doi: 10.1080/713755980. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ruxton GD, Roberts G. Are vigilance sequences a consequence of intrinsic chaos or external changes? Anim Behav. 1999 Feb;57(2):493–495. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1998.0965. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Scannell J., Roberts G., Lazarus J. Prey scan at random to evade observant predators. Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Mar 7;268(1466):541–547. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1388. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]