Self-Organization in Biological Systems

Camazine, Scott; Franks, Nigel R.; Sneyd, James; Bonabeau, Eric; Deneubourg, Jean‐Louis; Theraula, Guy

doi:10.1515/9780691212920

Cited by 1,348 publications

(242 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

237

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The study of self‐organization, despite the large amount literature on the topic, is a relatively new field, especially when considering the emergence of decentralized patterns in ecological systems (reviewed by Camazine et al 2001). We consider it appropriate to define self‐organization as the emergence of complex patterns at the global level of a system due to simple, local interactions between individuals (or between individuals and their immediate environment – biotic or abiotic) that have no awareness of the overall picture to which they contribute.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…thousands, hundreds of thousands or million of agents, elements or events involved (Nicolis and Prigogine 1977, Deneubourg et al 1986). Furthermore, social species have been the most investigated group of animals (Deneubourg and Goss 1989, Camazine et al 2001), especially in the context of aggregation (Parrish and Hamner 1997, Parrish and Edelstein‐Keshet 1999) and foraging (Seeley 1987, Portha et al 2002). However, evidence has shown that self‐organized patterns can also arise from small numbers of individual interactions with an absence of sociality and cooperative behaviour (Rivault et al 1999, Ferrer and Penteriani 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can prey behaviour induce spatially synchronic aggregation of solitary predators?

Penteriani

Melián²,

Otálora³

et al. 2006

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

M. 2006. Can prey behaviour induce spatially synchronic aggregation of solitary predators? Á Oikos 113: 497 Á505.Spatio-temporal patterns of predator aggregations within their settlement areas (i.e. temporary settling zones used during dispersal or, more generally, foraging patches) were studied. By integrating the main behavioural rules of juveniles of Spanish imperial eagles Aquila adalberti during dispersal with the temporal availability of the eagles' main prey, we have developed several individual-based models under different simulation scenarios. The results suggest that the spatially synchrony of the aggregation patterns that we observed were derived from a combination of behavioural responses of the prey and the distances between available settlement areas. These results are discussed in the context of predator Áprey relationships, optimal foraging and self-organizing processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can prey behaviour induce spatially synchronic aggregation of solitary predators?

Penteriani

Melián²,

Otálora³

et al. 2006

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The distinction that we make above between groups with differentiated social relationships and aggregations in which members are broadly undifferentiated (and therefore no or few stable relationships exist) can be linked to the distinction between local and global communication (Camazine et al 2001, Conradt and Roper 2005, Ballerini et al 2008, Ramseyer et al 2009, Nagy et al 2010, Fischer and Zinner 2011). In small groups, individuals can develop and maintain stable social relationships with all group members, and can similarly communicate with them by sending information, but also by receiving and processing it, representing a situation where global communication is possible.…”

Section: Information Acquisition and Transfermentioning

confidence: 99%

Collective decision‐making and fission–fusion dynamics: a conceptual framework

Sueur

King

Conradt

et al. 2011

Oikos

187

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sociality exists in an extraordinary range of ecological settings. For individuals to accrue the benefi ts associated with social interactions, they are required to maintain a degree of spatial and temporal coordination in their activities, and make collective decisions. Such coordination and decision-making has been the focus of much recent research. However, eff orts largely have been directed toward understanding patterns of collective behaviour in relatively stable and cohesive groups. Less well understood is how fi ssion -fusion dynamics mediate the process and outcome of collective decisions making. Here, we aim to apply established concepts and knowledge to highlight the implications of fi ssion -fusion dynamics for collective decisions, presenting a conceptual framework based on the outcome of a small-group discussion INCORE meeting (funded by the European Community ' s Sixth Framework Programme). First, we discuss how the degree of uncertainty in the environment shapes social fl exibility and therefore the types of decisions individuals make in diff erent social settings. Second, we propose that the quality of social relationships and the energetic needs of each individual infl uence fi ssion decisions. Th ird, we explore how these factors aff ect the probability of individuals to fuse. Fourth, we discuss how group size and fi ssionfusion dynamics may aff ect communication processes between individuals at a local or global scale to reach a consensus or to fi ssion. Finally, we off er a number of suggestions for future research, capturing emerging ideas and concepts on the interaction between collective decisions and fi ssion -fusion dynamics.

show abstract

“…Others examine governance in the interactions of largely autonomous systems (Fischer‐Lescano & Teubner ), in self‐organizing systems that lack apparent intentionality (cf Camazine et al. ), or in certain actor‐network forms that have not (or not yet) supported the delineation and articulation of forms of authority and governance (Latour ).…”

Section: Indicators As Technologies Of Global Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Indicators as a Technology of Global Governance

Davis¹,

Kingsbury²,

Merry³

2012

Law Soc Rev

293

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of indicators is a prominent feature of contemporary global governance. Indicators are used to compare and rank states for purposes as varied as deciding how to allocate foreign aid or investment and determining whether states have complied with their treaty obligations. This article defines the concept of an indicator, analyzes distinctive features of indicators as technologies of governance, and identifies various ways in which the use of indicators has the potential to alter the topology and dynamics of global governance. Particular attention is paid to how indicators can affect processes of standard setting, decisionmaking, and contestation in global governance. The World Bank Doing Business indicators and the United Nations Human Development Index are analyzed as case studies.

show abstract

Self-Organization in Biological Systems

Cited by 1,348 publications

References 2 publications

Can prey behaviour induce spatially synchronic aggregation of solitary predators?

Can prey behaviour induce spatially synchronic aggregation of solitary predators?

Collective decision‐making and fission–fusion dynamics: a conceptual framework

Indicators as a Technology of Global Governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About