The ghost of social environments past: dominance relationships include current interactions and experience carried over from previous groups

Abstract

).Dominance hierarchies pervade animal societies. Within a static social environment, in which group size and composition are unchanged, an individual's hierarchy rank results from intrinsic (e.g. body size) and extrinsic (e.g. previous experiences) factors. Little is known, however, about how dominance relationships are formed and maintained when group size and composition are dynamic. Using a fusion -fission protocol, we fused groups of previously isolated shore crabs (Carcinus maenas) into larger groups, and then restored groups to their original size and composition. Pre-fusion hierarchies formed independently of individuals' sizes, and were maintained within a static group via winner/loser effects. Post-fusion hierarchies differed from pre-fusion ones; losing fights during fusion led to a decline in an individual's rank between pre-and post-fusion conditions, while spending time being aggressive during fusion led to an improvement in rank. In post-fusion tanks, larger individuals achieved better ranks than smaller individuals. In conclusion, dominance hierarchies in crabs represent a complex combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors, in which experiences from previous groups can carry over to affect current competitive interactions.

Cumulative effects of body size and social experience on aggressive behaviour in a subsocial bee

“…A combined role for social experience and physiological traits is common in nature for determining dominance hierarchies (Berdoy et al, 1995;Earley & Dugatkin, 2006;Seebacher & Wilson, 2007;Tanner et al, 2011), and the most likely explanation for the results of this study. Here we found that size may predict dominance in single interactions, but that prior experience predicts dominance in repeated interactions.…”

“…Cumulative effects of both social experience and physiological traits have also been observed in multiple taxa (Earley & Dugatkin, 2006;Tanner et al, 2011). Physiological traits and social environment are co-predictors of dominance in many systems, with greater effects resulting from experience (Chase et al, 2002) or individual characteristics (Kasumavic et al, 2009), and often with both contributing equally (Schuett, 1997;Earley & Dugatkin, 2006;Seebacher & Wilson, 2007;Tanner et al, 2011).…”

Switchable Wettability of the Honeybee’s Tongue Surface Regulated by Erectable Glossal Hairs

“…The wettability changes by the EA, and maximizes the net intake energy together with EA itself. Such switchable wettability resembles the positive feedback ( Tanner et al. 2011 ) in nature, which amplifies the increment of energy intake in the nectar feeding process.…”

Sociogenomics of Cooperation and Conflict during Colony Founding in the Fire Ant Solenopsis invicta

“…Indeed, genes associate with ‘response to stress’ were significantly enriched, with a set of 30 transcripts differentially regulated among the four groups of manipulated queens (see Results and Table S12). The effects of restructuring social ranks have not been considered broadly in other species [87], but decreased social rank in dark-eyed junco birds is associated with increased metabolic rates, while increased social rank results in a much lower physiological change [88]. Similarly, for dominant, but not for subordinate, birds there is a measurable metabolic cost to joining a new social group [88].…”