Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Territorial defense in a group-living solitary forager: who, where, against whom?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Territoriality is of great significance for many species and a characteristic of most group-living animals. Territoriality is thought to lead to increased reproductive success by defending a particular area containing critical resources. I describe several factors that influence territorial aggression in free-ranging striped mice (Rhabdomys pumilio), a group-living solitary forager. I induced territorial aggression by attracting mice of different groups using bait either at territory boundaries or in front of nests. Striped mice are territorial and make decisions about whether or not to attack a mouse from another group based upon several factors: (1) the sex of the opponent: males are much more likely to attack strange males than strange females, whereas no sex specific aggression was observed in females; (2) the body size of the opponent: striped mice are much more likely to attack a strange mouse that is lighter than themselves; and (3) the location of encounters: striped mice are much more likely to attack strangers, even those significantly heavier than themselves, in front of the nest than at territory boundaries. These variations in territorial responses between different types of individuals may be due to the different ultimate consequences of territorial aggression for different animals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anzenberger G (1985) How stranger encounters of common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) are influenced by family members: the quality of behaviour. Folia Primatol 45:204–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Austad SN (1983) A game theoretical interpretation of male combat in the bowl and doily spider (Frontinella pyramitela). Anim Behav 31:59–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Barlow GW, Rogers W, Cappeto RV (1977) Incompatibility and assortative mating in the midas cichlid. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2:49-59

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolyard KJ, Rowland WJ (2000). The effects of spatial context and social experience on the territorial aggression of male threespine stickleback. Behaviour 137:845–864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyston EE, Morelli TL, Holekamp KE (2001) Sex differences in territorial behavior exhibited by the spotted hyena (Hyaenidae, Crocuta crocuta). Ethology 107:369–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks PM (1982) Aspects of the reproduction, growth and development of the four-striped mouse, Rhabdomys pumilio (Sparrman, 1784). Mammalia 46:53–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler CR (1995) Practical considerations in the use of simultaneous inference for multiple tests. Anim Behav 49:524–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choate TS (1972) Behavioural studies on some Rhodesian rodents. Zool Afr 7:103–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH, Brotherton PNM, O’Riain MJ, Griffin AS, Gaynor D, Sharpe L, Kansky R, Manser MB, McIlrath GM (2000) Individual contributions to babysitting in a cooperative mongoose, Suricata suricatta. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:301–305

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cooney R (2002) Colony defence in Damaraland mole-rats, Cryptomys damarensis. Behav Ecol 13:160–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies NB, Houston AI (1981) Owners and satellites: the economics of territory defence in the pied wagtail, Motacilla alba. J Anim Ecol 50:157–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewsbury DA, Dawson WW (1979) African four-striped grass mouse (Rhabdomys pumilio), a diurnal-crepuscular muroid rodent, in the behavioral laboratory. Behav Res Method Instrument 11:329–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Doolan SP, MacDonald DW (1996) Dispersal and extra-territorial prospecting by slender-tailed meerkats (Suricata suricatta) in the south-western Kalahari. J Zool 240:59–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar RIM (1995) The mating systm of callitrichid primates: II. The impact of helpers. Anim Behav 50:1071–1089

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emlen ST (1982) The evolution of helping. II. The role of behavioral conflict. Am Nat 119:40–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewald PW (1985) Influence of asymmetries in resource quality and age on aggression and dominance in black-chinned hummingbirds. Anim Behav 33:705–719

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewald PW, Orians GH (1983) Effects of resource depression on use of inexpensive and escalated aggressive behavior: experimental tests using anna hummingbirds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 12:95–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Fietz J (2004) Pair-living and mating strategies in the fat-tailed dwarf lemur (Cheirogaleus medius). In: Reichhard U, Boesch C (eds) Monogamy: mating strategies and partnership in birds, humans and other mammals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (in press)

  • Francis RC (1990) Temperament in a fish: a longitudinal study of the development of individual differences in aggression and social rank in the Midas cichlid. Ethology 85:311–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Gese EM (2001) Territorial defense by coyotes (Canis latrans) in Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming: who, how, where, and why. Can J Zool 79:980–987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray SJ, Jensen SP, Hurst JL (2002) Effects of resource distribution on activity and territory defence in house mice, Mus domesticus. Anim Behav 63:531–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinsohn R, Packer C (1995) Complex cooperative strategies in group-territorial African lions. Science 269:1260–1262

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hurst JL, Barnard CJ (1995) Kinship and social tolerance among female and juvenile wild house mice: kin bias but not kin discrimination. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 36:333–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kawamichi T, Kawamichi M (1979) Spatial organization and territory of tree shrews (Tupaia glis). Anim Behav 27:381–393

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruuk H (1978) Spatial organisation and territorial behaviour of the European badger Meles meles. J Zool 184:1-19

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazaro-Perea C (2001) Intergroup interactions in wild common marmosets, Calithrix jacchus: territorial defence and asessment of neighbours. Anim Behav 62:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maher CR, Lott DF (1995) Definitions of territoriality used in the study of variation in vertebrate spacing systems. Anim Behav 49:1581–1597

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith JM, Parker GA (1976) The logic of asymmetric contests. Anim Behav 24:159–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills MGL (1983) Behavioural mechanisms in territory and group maintenance of the brown hyaena, Hyaena brunna, in the Southern Kalahari. Anim Behav 31:503–510

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller AE, Thalmann U (2000) Origin and evolution of primate social organisation: a reconstruction. Biol Rev 77:405–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostfeld RS (1985) Limiting resources and territoriality in microtine rodents. Am Nat 126:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palanza P, Re L, Mainardi D, Brain PF, Parmigiani S (1996) Male and female competitive strategies of wild house mice pairs (Mus musculus domesticus) confronted with intruders of different sex and age in artificial territories. Behaviour 133:863–882

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA (1974) Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J Theor Biol 47:223–243

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parker GA, Rubenstein DI (1981) Role assessment, reserve strategy, and acquisition of information in asymmetric animal conflicts. Anim Behav 29:221–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker KJ, Phillips KM, Lee TM (2001) Development of selective partner preferences in captive male and female meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Anim Behav 61:1217–1226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrin MR (1980) The breeding strategies of two co-existing rodents, Rhabdomys pumilio (Sparman, 1784) and Otomys irroratus (Brants, 1827). Acta Oecol 1:383–410

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrin MR, Ercoli C, Dempster ER (2001) The role of agonistic behaviour in the population of two syntopic African grassland rodents, the striped mouse Rhabdomys pumilio (Sparman 1784) and the multimammate mouse Mastomys natalensis (A. Smith 1834) (Mammalia Rodentia). Trop Zool 14:7–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Putland DA, Goldizen AW (1998) Territorial behaviour in the Tasmanian native hen: group and individual performance. Anim Behav 56:1455–1463

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Randall JA, Hekkala ER, Cooper LD, Barfield J (2002) Familiarity and flexible mating strategies of a solitary rodent, Dipodomys ingens. Anim Behav 64:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Schradin C, Anzenberger G (2001a) Costs of infant carrying in common marmosets, Callithrix jacchus: an experimental analysis. Anim Behav 62:289–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schradin C, Anzenberger G (2001b) Infant carrying in family groups of Goeldi’s monkeys (Callimico goeldii). Am J Primatol 53:57–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schradin C, Lamprecht J (2000) Female-biased immigration and male peace keeping in groups of the shell-dwelling cichlid fish Neolamprologus multifasciatus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 48:236–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schradin C, Lamprecht J (2002) Causes of female emigration in the group-living cichlid fish Neolamprologus multifasciatus. Ethology 108:237–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schradin C, Pillay N (2003) Paternal care in the social and diurnal striped mouse (Rhabdomys pumilio): laboratory and field evidence. J Comp Psychol 117:317–324.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schradin C, Pillay N (2004) The striped mouse from the succulent karoo of South Africa: a territorial group living solitary forager with communal breeding and helpers at the nest. J Comp Psychol 118 (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel S, Castellan MJ (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw-Hill, New York

  • Stamps J (1994) Territorial behavior: testing the assumptions. Adv Study Behav 23:173–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Taborsky M (1984) Broodcare helpers in the cichlid fish Lamprologus brichardi: their costs and benefits. Anim Behav 32:1236–1252

    Google Scholar 

  • Taborsky M (1994) Sneakers, satellites, and helpers: parasitic and cooperative behavior in fish reproduction. Adv Study Behav 23:1–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Temeles EJ (1994) The role of neighbours in territorial systems: when are they ‘dear enemies’? Anim Behav 47:339–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tinbergen N (1972) Instinktlehre, 5th edn. Parey, Berlin

  • Trivers RL (1971) The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Q Rev Biol 46:35–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivers RL (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In: Campbell B (ed) Sexual selection and the descent of man. Aldine, Chicago, pp 136–179

  • Whiting MJ (1999) When to be neighbourly: differential agonistic responses in the lizard Platysaurus broadleyi. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 46:210–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson GS, Baker AE (1988) Communal nesting among genetically similar house mice. Ethology 77:103–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Willan BR (1982) Social ecology of Otomys irroparatus, Rhabdomys pumilio and Mastomys natalensis. PhD thesis, University of Natal, South Africa

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Northern Cape Department of Agriculture, Land Reform, Environment and Conservation for their assistance. I am very grateful to Mr Klaas van Zyl, Enrico Oosthuysen and their staff at Goegap Nature Reserve for their support and to R. Gutzat for field assistance during this study. Several discussions and important criticisms by G. Anzenberger and N. Pillay and the comments of S. Krackow, S.C. Alberts and four anonymous referees greatly improved this manuscript. N. Pillay and D. Reeder corrected the English. This study was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Naturwissenschaften. Animal ethical clearance number: AESC 2001/32/3.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ecophysiological Studies Research Group, School of Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Private Bag 3, Wits 2050, South Africa

    Carsten Schradin

Authors
  1. Carsten Schradin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carsten Schradin.

Additional information

Communicated by S. Alberts

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schradin, C. Territorial defense in a group-living solitary forager: who, where, against whom?. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55, 439–446 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-003-0733-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-003-0733-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation