Long-term roosting data reveal a unimodular social network in large fission-fusion society of the colony-living Natterer’s bat (Myotis nattereri)

Zeus, Veronika M.; Reusch, Christine; Kerth, Gerald

doi:10.1007/s00265-018-2516-4

Cited by 26 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the two tree-roosting Myotis species, females always roosted with others, but the composition of the roosting aggregation often changed. These fission-fusion dynamics, also observed in primates and other species (Aureli et al 2008), appear to be common in cavity-dwelling bat species (Metheny et al 2007;August et al 2014;Garg et al 2018;Zeus et al 2018). Table 1 shows that nearly every species forms nonrandom associations in which communities can be identified even though roost sites could typically accomodate a larger number of individuals than are found (although it might be difficult for many more T. tricolor individuals to roost in a single rolled leaf).…”

Section: Patterns Of Association and Roosting Behaviormentioning

confidence: 69%

“…Careful monitoring of marked individuals over time has, nevertheless, revealed the presence of social units defined by repeated roosting associations in, for example, Chalinolobus gouldii (Godinho et al 2015), D. rotundus (Wilkinson 1985a), E. fuscus (Metheny et al 2007), Myotis bechsteinii (Kerth and König 1999;Kerth et al 2011), M. daubentonii (August et al 2014), M. septentrionalis (Patriquin et al 2010), and Nyctalus lasiopterus (Fortuna et al 2009). Interestingly, M. nattereri forms social units in England (August et al 2014) but not in Germany (Zeus et al 2018). Thus, the social structure of many cavity roosting bats is complex and resembles other fission-fusion animal societies (Aureli et al 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As in African elephant, Loxodonta africana (Archie et al 2006), giraffe, Giraffa camelopardalis (Carter et al 2013), and wild boar, Sus scrofa (Podgorski et al 2014), some, but not all, members of bat social units are related (Wilkinson 1985b;Kerth et al 2002Kerth et al , 2011Metheny et al 2007;Patriquin et al 2013;Zeus et al 2018). These observations suggest that individuals identify members of their social unit using some type of cue or signal that is not strictly associated with kinship.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Kinship, association, and social complexity in bats

Wilkinson

Carter

Bohn

et al. 2019

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among mammals, bats exhibit extreme variation in sociality, with some species living largely solitary lives while others form colonies of more than a million individuals. Some tropical species form groups during the day that persist throughout the year while many temperate species only gather into groups during hibernation or parturition. How groups form and then persist has now been described for a number of species, but the degree to which kinship explains patterns of association has never been quantified across species. Here, we use social network analysis and genetic data to determine the extent to which relatedness contributes to associations among individuals estimated from free-ranging animals across nine species from four families of bats. Network analysis reveals that all species show evidence of emergent social structure. Variation in the strength of the relationship between genetic relatedness and social association appears to be related to the degree of roost switching, i.e., species in which individuals change roosts frequently tend to exhibit higher levels of association among relatives. Sex-biased dispersal determines whether associations were between male or female relatives. The strength of associations among kin does not predict known occurrence of complex behaviors, such as dominance or various types of cooperation, indicating that kinship is not a prerequisite for social complexity in bats. Significance statement The number of differentiated relationships has been proposed as a way to measure social complexity. Among primates, relationships can be differentiated on the basis of rank, age, kinship, or association. Application of this approach to other groups of mammals that vary in sociality could help reveal ecological, behavioral, or cognitive similarities and differences between species.

show abstract

Section: Patterns Of Association and Roosting Behaviormentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Kinship, association, and social complexity in bats

Wilkinson

Carter

Bohn

et al. 2019

Behav Ecol Sociobiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2014) showed that golden-crowned sparrows ( Zonotrichia atricapilla ) that flocked together in one winter flocked together in the subsequent winter more often than expected based on the degree of home range overlap. Roosting associations in Bechstein’s bats ( Myotis bechsteinii ) and Natterer’s bats ( Myotis nattereri ) were found to remain stable across several years despite high fission-fusion dynamics (Kerth, Perony & Schweitzer 2011; Zeus, Reusch & Kerth 2018). Stanley, Mettke-Hofmann, Hager and Shultz (2018) revealed that, despite seasonal fluctuations in gregariousness and overall weak social bonds, semi-feral ponies ( Equus caballus ) maintained stable association preferences over three years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Season-specific carry-over of early-life associations in a monogamous bird species

Kurvers

Prox

Farine

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

24 25 1. Social bonds can have important fitness consequences. Although there is increasing 26 evidence that social bonds carry over across contexts, few studies have investigated 27 whether social bonds formed early in life are carried over to adulthood. For example, 28 juveniles of monogamous species go through a major life-history stage transition-pair 29 formation-during which the pair bond becomes a central unit of the social organization. 30 At present, it remains unclear if pair members retain their early-life social bonds after 31pair formation and, if so, when they display these preferences most strongly. 32 2. Here we investigated whether bonds formed early in life carry over into adulthood and 33 whether carry-over was dependent on season, in a monogamous species. Moreover, we 34 investigated the role of familiarity, genetic relatedness and aggression on the 35 perseverance of social bonds. 36 3. We studied the social structure before and after pair formation in captive barnacle geese 37 (Branta leucopsis), a highly social, long-lived, monogamous species. We constructed 38 social networks of groups of geese before pair formation, during the subsequent breeding 39 season, and in the following wintering season. From these networks, we identified the 40 preferred associations among individuals, and how these are carried over during seasonal 41 changes. 42 4. We found that early-life associations in females were lost during the breeding season, 43 but resurfaced during the subsequent wintering season. In males, the early-life 44 associations persisted across both seasons, and were mediated by genetic relatedness and 45 familiarity. The high level of aggressiveness of males, but not females, in the breeding 46 season suggests that males may have played a key role in shaping both their own social 47 environment and that of their female partners. 48 3 5. By taking advantage of a captive population in which animals had no temporal or spatial 49 restrictions to re-associate after pairing and for which we had complete data on their 50 social history, we show that early-life social relationships can be maintained well into 51 later life. Such bonds can be sustained even if they are temporarily disrupted, for example 52 due to reproductive behaviour. Our findings therefore highlight that the early-life social 53 environment can have life-long consequences on individuals' social environment. 54 55 Key-words: aggression, early life, familiarity, genetic relatedness, monogamous, pair 56 formation, social bonds, social networks 57 58 59 Consistency of social bonds affects the extent to which individuals can develop cooperative 60 interactions, build up reputations and form stable dominance hierarchies (Trivers 1971; Axelrod . There is increasing evidence showing that social bonds 65 carry over across time, place, and context. Shizuka et al. (2014) showed that golden-crowned 66 sparrows (Zonotrichia atricapilla) that flocked together in one winter flocked together in the 67 subsequent winter more often than expected ba...

show abstract

“…Shizuka et al (2014) showed that golden-crowned sparrows (Zonotrichia atricapilla) that flocked together in one winter flocked together in the subsequent winter more often than expected based on the degree of home range overlap. Roosting associations in Bechstein's bats (Myotis bechsteinii) and Natterer's bats (Myotis nattereri) were found to remain stable across several years despite high fission-fusion dynamics (Kerth et al, 2011;Zeus et al, 2018). Stanley et al (2018) revealed that, despite seasonal fluctuations in gregariousness and overall weak social associations, semi-feral ponies (Equus caballus) maintained stable association preferences over three years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%