Distinguishing Social from Nonsocial Navigation in Moving Animal Groups

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. abstract: Many animals, such as migrating shoals of fish, navigate in groups. Knowing the mechanisms involved in animal navigation is important when it comes to explaining navigation accuracy, dispersal patterns, population and evolutionary dynamics, and consequently, the design of conservation strategies. When navigating toward a common target, animals could interact socially by sharing available information directly or indirectly, or each individual could navigate by itself and aggregations may not disperse because all animals are moving toward the same target. Here we present an analysis technique that uses individual movement trajectories to determine the extent to which individuals in navigating groups interact socially, given knowledge of their target. The basic idea of our approach is that the movement directions of individuals arise from a combination of responses to the environment and to other individuals. We estimate the relative importance of these responses, distinguishing between social and nonsocial interactions. We develop and test our method, using simulated groups, and we demonstrate its applicability to empirical data in a case study on groups of guppies moving toward shelter in a tank. Our approach is generic and can be extended to different scenarios of animal group movement. The University of Chicago Press and

Oceanographic and behavioural assumptions in models of the fate of coral and coral reef fish larvae

“…For larval recruitment on downstream reefs, high oceanic diffusion and strong reversing tidal currents in reefal waters are needed bring the larvae to within the hearing distance of the reef, which enables the larvae to swim directionally to the reef following auditory cues. The nature of oceanographic filaments [79], social interactions among larvae that may modify directional swimming [80], the need to forage that modifies directional swimming [61] and the use of other sensors (e.g. sun-compass orientation; [58]) may also further influence the recruitment rates.…”

Winning, losing, and reaching out

“…Work on how extrinsic factors affect aggression and dominance hierarchies has generally focused on what are known as winner and loser effects (Landau 1951a(Landau , 1951bMcGregor et al 1999;McGregor and Peake 2000;McGregor 2005;Hsu et al 2006Hsu et al , 2009Hock and Huber 2009;Fawcett and Johnstone 2010;Fuxjager and Marler 2010), though a more general social network approach to extrinsic factors has been emerging recently (Croft et al 2008Krause et al 2011;Bode et al 2012;Jacoby et al 2012;Wilson et al 2013). Winner and loser effects are defined as an increased probability of winning at time T, based on victories at time T-1, T-2, and so on, and an increased probability of losing at time T, based on losing at time T-1, T-2, etc., respectively.…”

Modelling larval dispersal and behaviour of coral reef fishes

“…Empirical testing of this hypothesis in reef fish larvae is problematic since individuals that are orienting accurately towards the same target may aggregate without interacting socially. A method that addresses this issue was developed by Bode et al (2012) to quantify the level of social interaction occurring during a navigation event. This method was tested empirically on schools of fish in the same study (Bode et al, 2012).…”