Abstract
Many animals gain benefits from living in groups, such as a dilution in predation risk when they are closely aggregated (referred to as the 'selfish herd'). Game theory has been used to predict many properties of groups (such as the expected group size), but little is known about the proximate mechanisms by which animals achieve these predicted properties. We explore a possible proximate mechanism using a spatially explicit, individual-based model, where individuals can choose to rest or forage on the basis of a rule-of-thumb that is dependent upon both their energetic reserves and the presence and actions of neighbours. The resulting behaviour and energetic reserves of individuals, and the resulting group sizes, are shown to be affected both by the ability of the forager to detect conspecifics and areas of the environment suitable for foraging, and by the distribution of energy in the environment. The model also demonstrates that if animals are able to choose (based upon their energetic reserves) between selecting the best foraging sites available and moving towards their neighbours for safety, then this also has significant effects upon individuals and group sizes. The implications of the proposed rule-of-thumb are discussed.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (145.9 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Flierl G., Grünbaum D., Levins S., Olson D. From individuals to aggregations: the interplay between behavior and physics. J Theor Biol. 1999 Feb 21;196(4):397–454. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1998.0842. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hamilton IM. Recruiters and Joiners: Using Optimal Skew Theory to Predict Group Size and the Division of Resources within Groups of Social Foragers. Am Nat. 2000 May;155(5):684–695. doi: 10.1086/303349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hamilton W. D. Geometry for the selfish herd. J Theor Biol. 1971 May;31(2):295–311. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(71)90189-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- James R., Bennett P. G., Krause J. Geometry for mutualistic and selfish herds: the limited domain of danger. J Theor Biol. 2004 May 7;228(1):107–113. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2003.12.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Krause J. Differential fitness returns in relation to spatial position in groups. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1994 May;69(2):187–206. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1994.tb01505.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rands S. A., Cuthill I. C. Separating the effects of predation risk and interrupted foraging upon mass changes in the blue tit Parus caeruleus. Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Sep 7;268(1478):1783–1790. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1653. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rands Sean A., Cowlishaw Guy, Pettifor Richard A., Rowcliffe J. Marcus, Johnstone Rufus A. Spontaneous emergence of leaders and followers in foraging pairs. Nature. 2003 May 22;423(6938):432–434. doi: 10.1038/nature01630. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ruckstuhl K. E., Neuhaus P. Sexual segregation in ungulates: a comparative test of three hypotheses. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2002 Feb;77(1):77–96. doi: 10.1017/s1464793101005814. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Viscido S. V., Miller M., Wethey D. S. The response of a selfish herd to an attack from outside the group perimeter. J Theor Biol. 2001 Feb;208(3):315–328. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.2000.2221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Viscido Steven V., Miller Matthew, Wethey David S. The dilemma of the selfish herd: the search for a realistic movement rule. J Theor Biol. 2002 Jul 21;217(2):183–194. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.2002.3025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]