Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on November 27, 2007
Behavioral Ecology 2008 19(1):193-201; doi:10.1093/beheco/arm122
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/1/193    most recent
arm122v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morrell, L. J.
Right arrow Articles by James, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Morrell, L. J.
Right arrow Articles by James, R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Mechanisms for aggregation in animals: rule success depends on ecological variables

Lesley J. Morrella and Richard Jamesb

a Institute of Integrative and Comparative Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK b Department of Physics and Centre for Mathematical Biology, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK

Address correspondence to L.J. Morell. E-mail: l.j.morrell{at}leeds.ac.uk.


   Abstract

Under the threat of predation, animals often group tightly together, with all group members benefiting from a reduction in predation risk through various mechanisms, including the dilution, encounter-dilution, and predator confusion effects. Additionally, the selfish herd hypothesis was first put forward by Hamilton (1971). He proposed that in order to reduce its risk of predation, an individual should approach its nearest neighbor, reducing its risk at the expense of those around it. Despite extensive empirical support, the selfish herd hypothesis has been criticized on theoretical grounds: approaching the nearest neighbor does not result in the observed dense aggregations, and the nearest neighbor in space is not necessarily the one that can be reached fastest. Increasingly complex movement rules have been proposed, successfully producing dense aggregations of individuals. However, no study to date has made a full comparison of the different proposed movement rules within the same modeling environment. Further, ecologically relevant parameters, such as the size and density of a population or group and the time it takes a predator to attack, have thus far been ignored. Here, we investigate the reduction in risk for animals aggregating using different strategies and demonstrate the importance of ecological parameters on risk reduction in group-living animals. We find that complex rules are most successful at reducing risk in small, compact populations, whereas simpler rules are most successful in larger, low-density populations, and when predators attack quickly after being detected by their prey.

Key words: domain of danger, group living, population density, population size, predation risk, selfish herd.

Received 30 August 2007; revised 19 October 2007; accepted 22 October 2007.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Behav EcolHome page
L. J. Morrell and W. L. Romey
Optimal individual positions within animal groups
Behav. Ecol., July 1, 2008; 19(4): 909 - 919.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.