Territoriality and Site-related Dominance: On Two Related Concepts in Avian Social Organization

To graze or gorge: consistency and flexibility of individual foraging tactics in tits

An individual's foraging behaviour and time allocated to feeding have direct consequences for its fitness. Despite much research on population-level foraging decisions, few studies have investigated individual differences in fine-scale daily foraging patterns among wild animals. Here, we explore the consistency and plasticity of feeding tactics of individual great tits (Parus major) and blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus), using a grid of 65 automated feeding stations in a 385-ha woodland, during three winters. We use a principal component analysis to describe individual variation in six feeding parameters and examine how these differences covary with dominance-linked attributes (species, age and sex), the personality trait 'exploration behaviour', distance to territory and local competition intensity. Analysis of 933 086 feeder visits by 3134 individuals revealed that the majority of variation in the timing of feeding was explained by two principal components. PC1 ('binge-eating'), accounting for 38% of variation, captured temporal clustering of feeding, with high repeatability both within and between years (r range: 0·42-0·55). PC2 ('transience'), accounting for 27% of variance, described how much individuals used feeders and was also repeatable (r: 0·34-0·62). While exhibiting consistent individual differences, birds also showed flexibility in foraging patterns, binge-eating less and using feeders more when they experienced greater local competition. Individuals in behaviourally dominant states (great tits, males and adults) binged more than subordinate birds (blue tits, females and juveniles) when their territories were distant from feeding stations. Moreover, great tits and males used feeders more than blue tits and females respectively, while birds feeding further from their territory used feeders less than those feeding closer. 'Exploration behaviour' was unrelated to both measures of daily foraging behaviour. This study presents some of the first evidence that birds use consistent alternative foraging tactics at a fine temporal scale. Individuals are consistent in their tactics, and also adjust their foraging behaviour with changes in local competition. Hence, studies of foraging behaviour should consider the extent to which such individual-level variability in foraging behaviour is under selection.

The effect of local dominance and reciprocal tolerance on feeding aggregations of ocellated antbirds

We studied ocellated antbirds (Phaenostictus mcleannani) to test the hypothesis that reciprocal tolerance between dominant individuals can favour feeding in aggregations. Mated pairs hold large non-exclusive feeding ranges, but roost and nest in a small portion of this range ('roosting area'); adjacent roosting neighbours are unrelated. Ocellated antbirds congregate to feed on arthropods fleeing from nomadic swarms of army ants that move across the ranges of many pairs. We used playback experiments to simulate acoustic challenges, and results showed that males responded aggressively to other males only in their roosting areas. Responses to adjacent neighbours were less aggressive than to non-neighbours (i.e. the 'dear enemy' effect). Prey intake rates were higher when birds fed in their own roosting area or in that of adjacent neighbours compared with more distant sites. Males tolerated adjacent neighbours at swarm fronts where prey are most dense, but more distant neighbours were displaced. Despite small samples for some analyses, our results suggest that reciprocal tolerance between adjacent unrelated neighbours can ameliorate intraspecific competition within ephemeral feeding aggregations.

Changing tactics: dominance, territoriality, and the responses of "primary" males to competition from conditional breeders in the variegated pupfish (Cyprinodon variegatus)

Using variegated pupfish, we examined the flexibility in "primary" male tactics when dealing with the aggressive costs of competition. Analogous to conditional mating strategies, we expected primary males to exhibit one of two interrelated tactics (i.e. dominance or territoriality) in response to different numbers of competitors. In the field, competitors influenced aggression. Primary males defended territories; residents facing more intruders engaged in more chases and obtained fewer spawns per female. In the laboratory, primary males showed dominance at low density, controlling most of the aquarium. With increasing competitor numbers, primary males reduced the area controlled and defended territories. Territories occurred with intermediate to high competitor numbers and only under male-biased sex ratios. During these interactions, aggression was highest and competitors were too many for dominant males to suppress the assertions made by each subordinate to increase its rank. Relinquished control of the entire domain enabled a previously subordinate male to establish a territory in the undefended portion of the aquarium. Reduction in defended area related to a reduction in territorial males' spawning success relative to dominants. These results suggested that primary males, like conditional breeders, would adopt the tactic that enabled them to spawn despite the constraints of competition.

Beyond dominance: the importance of leverage

The dominance concept as it is currently defined and applied in animal behavior is problematic. What has been traditionally considered dominance is actually a combination of dominance in the strict sense and power based upon other sources. Rather than working within the current paradigm, I propose a conceptual revision founded upon the more inclusive concept of power. Power is a phenomenon where a dyadic relationship is asymmetrical (Simon 1953) and can be divided into two types: dominance and leverage. Dominance is power based upon the ability to use force. Leverage is power based upon a resource that cannot be taken by force. Four characteristics of power are used in sociology (base, means, amount, and scope) that facilitate both the expansion of the power concept beyond traditional dominance and the application of these theoretical ideas in empirical studies. This cross-disciplinary approach to power allows a wide range of behaviors to be considered as critical while at the same time it focuses the attention of researchers to the aspects of power that differ among dyads, classes, and species. Power is not simply a linear combination of dominance and leverage, and more research is needed before the exact nature of this relationship can be clarified. By considering dominance as one form of power, this framework fosters a more complete understanding of power dynamics and their effects on animal societies.