Fitness Costs of Female Competition Linked to Resource Defense and Relatedness of Competitors.

AbstractFemale reproductive success is often limited by access to resources, and this can lead to social competition both within and between kin groups. Theory predicts that both resource availability and relatedness should influence the fitness consequences of social competition. However, testing key predictions requires differentiating the effects of these two factors. Here, we achieve this experimentally by manipulating the social environment of house mice, a facultative communal breeding species with known kin discrimination ability. This allows us to investigate (1) the reproductive costs of defending a limited resource in response to cues of social competition and (2) whether such costs, or their potential mitigation via cooperative behavior, are influenced by the relatedness of competitors. Our results support the hypothesis that resource defense can be costly for females, potentially trading off against maternal investment. When the availability of protected nest sites was limited, subjects (1) were more active, (2) responded more strongly to simulated territory intrusions via competitive signaling, and (3) produced smaller weaned offspring. However, we found no evidence that the propensity for kin to cooperate was influenced by the relatedness of rivals. Communal breeding between sisters occurred independently of the relatedness of competitors and communally breeding sisters weaned fewer offspring when competing with unrelated females, despite our study being designed to prevent infanticide between kin groups. Our findings thus demonstrate that female competition has fitness costs and that associating with kin is beneficial to avoid negative fitness consequences of competing with nonkin, in addition to more widely recognized kin-selected benefits.

Predators attacking virtual prey reveal the costs and benefits of leadership.

A long-standing assumption in social behavior is that leadership incurs costs as well as benefits, and this tradeoff can result in diversified social roles in groups. The major cost of leadership in moving animal groups is assumed to be predation, with individuals leading from the front of groups being targeted more often by predators. Nevertheless, empirical evidence for this is limited, and experimental tests are entirely lacking. To avoid confounding effects associated with observational studies, we presented a simulation of virtual prey to real fish predators to directly assess the predation cost of leadership. Prey leading others are at greater risk than those in the middle of groups, confirming that any benefits of leading may be offset by predation costs. Importantly, however, followers confer a net safety benefit to leaders, as prey leading others were less likely to be attacked compared with solitary prey. We also find that the predators preferentially attacked when solitary individuals were more frequent, but this effect was relatively weak compared with the preference for attacking solitary prey during an attack. Using virtual prey, where the appearance and behavior of the prey can be manipulated and controlled exactly, we reveal a hierarchy of risk from solitary to leading to following social strategies. Our results suggest that goal-orientated individuals (i.e., potential leaders) are under selective pressure to maintain group cohesion, favoring effective leadership rather than group fragmentation. Our results have significant implications for understanding the evolution and maintenance of different social roles in groups.

Marginal predation: do encounter or confusion effects explain the targeting of prey group edges?

Marginal predation, also known as the edge effect, occurs when aggregations of prey are preferentially targeted on their periphery by predators and has long been established in many taxa. Two main processes have been used to explain this phenomenon, the confusion effect and the encounter rate between predators and prey group edges. However, it is unknown at what size a prey group needs to be before marginal predation is detectable and to what extent each mechanism drives the effect. We conducted 2 experiments using groups of virtual prey being preyed upon by 3-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) to address these questions. In Experiment 1, we show that group sizes do not need to be large for marginal predation to occur, with this being detectable in groups of 16 or more. In Experiment 2, we find that encounter rate is a more likely explanation for marginal predation than the confusion effect in this system. We find that while confusion does affect predatory behaviors (whether or not predators make an attack), it does not affect marginal predation. Our results suggest that marginal predation is a more common phenomenon than originally thought as it also applies to relatively small groups. Similarly, as marginal predation does not need the confusion effect to occur, it may occur in a wider range of predator-prey species pairings, for example those where the predators search for prey using nonvisual sensory modalities.

Desperate Prawns: Drivers of Behavioural Innovation Vary across Social Contexts in Rock Pool Crustaceans.

Innovative behaviour may allow animals to cope with changes in their environment. Innovative propensities are known to vary widely both between and within species, and a growing body of research has begun to examine the factors that drive individuals to innovate. Evidence suggests that individuals are commonly driven to innovate by necessity; for instance by hunger or because they are physically unable to outcompete others for access to resources. However, it is not known whether the factors that drive individuals to innovate are stable across contexts. We examined contextual variation in the drivers of innovation in rock pool prawns (Palaemon spp), invertebrates that face widely fluctuating environments and may, through the actions of tides and waves, find themselves isolated or in groups. Using two novel foraging tasks, we examined the effects of body size and hunger in prawns tested in solitary and group contexts. When tested alone, small prawns were significantly more likely to succeed in a spatial task, and faster to reach the food in a manipulation task, while hunger state had no effect. In contrast, size had no effect when prawns were tested in groups, but food-deprived individuals were disproportionately likely to innovate in both tasks. We suggest that contextual variation in the drivers of innovation is likely to be common in animals living in variable environments, and may best be understood by considering variation in the perception of relative risks and rewards under different conditions.