Abstract
Dominance is an important element of life history. It assures access to resources, which, in turn, affects fitness. By establishing a hierarchy, females may monopolize resources while remaining philopatric. Our genetic study of the sandy pocket mouse, Chaetodipus siccus, has shown a genetic microstructure with private haplotypes in the extremely small species range (~270 km2). To explore these results we evaluate patterns of aggressive-submissive behavior among female C. siccus based on direct dominance, dominance over encounters and dominance based on the defense of food resources. Our findings suggest the presence of aggressive behaviors resulting in the establishment of dominant-subordinate relationship; this relationship remains constant even after a process of visual, auditory and olfactory contact and during the defense of food resources. These results may be linked to a strong territorial behavior that permits the formation of matrilineal nuclei that could be related to a genetic microstructure.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alvarez-Castañeda, S.T., Rios, E., 2011. Revision of Chaetodipus arenarius (Rodentia: Heteromyidae). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 161, 213–228.
Alvarez-Castañeda, S.T., 2003. Chaetodipus arenarius siccus. In: Roedores y carnívoros del noroeste de México incluidos en el proyecto NOM-059-ECOL-2001. Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste S.C. Base de datos SNIB-CONABIO. Proyecto W003, México.
Bernstein, I.S., 1981. Dominance: the baby and the bathwater. Behav. Brain Sci. 4, 419–457.
Bleich, V.C., Price, M.V., 1995. Aggressive behavior of Dipodomys stephensi, and Dipodomys agilis, a sympatric congener. J. Mammal. 76, 646–651.
Cooper, L.D., Randall, J.A., 2007. Seasonal changes in the home ranges of the giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens): a study of flexible social structure. J. Mammal. 88, 1000–1008.
Cooper, M.L., 2000. Random amplified polymorphic DNA analysis of southern brown bandicot (Isoodon obesulus) populations in Western Australia reveals genetic differentiation related to environmental variables. Mol. Ecol. 9, 469–479.
Corridi, P., Chiarotti, F., Bigi, S., Alleva, E., 1993. Familiarity with conspecific odor and isolation-induced aggressive behavior in male mice (Mus domesticus). J. Comp. Psychol. 107, 328–335.
Drews, C., 1993. The concept and definition of dominance in animal behaviour. Behaviour 125, 283–313.
Ebensperger, LA, 2001. A review of the evolutionary causes of rodent group-living. Acta Theriol. 46, 144–155.
Ebensperger, LA, 2003. Restricciones fisiológicas y evolución de la sociabilidad en roedores. In: BozinoviC., F. (Ed.), Fisiología ecológica y evolutiva. Teorías y casos de estudios en animales. Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, pp. 463–480.
Eisenberg, J.F., 1963. The Behavior of Heteromyid Rodents, vol. 69. University of California Publications in Zoology, pp. 12–100.
Excoffier, L., Laval, G., Schneider, S., 2005. Arlequin (version 3.0): An integrated software package for population genetic data analysis. Evol. Bioinf. 1, 47–50 (Online).
Floody, O.R., 1983. Hormones and aggression in female mammals. In: Svare, B. (Ed.), Hormones and Aggressive Behavior. Plenum Press, New York. Are staged dyadic encounters useful for studying aggressive behaviour of arvicoline rodents? Can. J. Zool. 75, 1051–1058.
Hoogland, J.L., 1995. The Black-tailed Prairie Dog: Social Life of a Burrowing Mammal. University of Chicago Press Chicago, Illinois and London.
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of Pennsylvania, 2014. Rodent Genotyping Methods Guideline. https://doi.org/www.upenn.edu/regulatoryaffairs/.
Johannesen, E., Brudevoll, J., Jenstad, M., Korslund, L., Kristoffersen, S., 2002. Behavioural dominance of grey-sided voles over bank voles in dyadic encounters. Ann. Zool. Fennici 39, 43–47.
Kaufmann, J.H., 1983. On the definitions and functions of dominance and territoriality. Biol. Rev. 58, 1–20.
Kleiman, D., 1977. Monogamy in mammals. Q. Rev. Biol. 52, 39–69.
Kruskal, W.H., Wallis, WA, 1952. Use of rank in one-criterion variance analysis. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 47, 583–621.
MesaroviC., M.D., Macko, D., Takahara, Y., 1970. Theory of Hierarchical, Multilevel Systems. Academic Press, New York, 29. pp.
Newmark, J.E., Jenkins, S.H., 2000. Sex differences in agonistic behavior of Merriam’s kangaroo rats (Dipodomys merriami). Am. Midl. Nat. 143, 377–388.
Oleinichenko, V.Yu., 2000. Behavior of the shrews Sorex volnuchini and S. raddei. Zool. Zhurnal 79, 939–953.
Pusey, A.E., Packer, C., 1997. The ecology of relationships. In: Krebs, J.R., Davies, N.B. (Eds.), Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach. Blackwell Science Ltd., Oxford, pp. 254–283.
Randall, JA, 1989. Neighbor recognition in a solitary desert rodent (Dipodomys merriami). Ethology 81, 123–133.
Randall, JA, 1993. Behavioural adaptations of desert rodents (Heteromyidae). Anim. Behav. 45, 263–287.
Rowell, T.E., 1974. Concept of social dominance. Behav. Biol. 11, 131–154.
Rychlik, L., Zwolak, R., 2006. Interespecific aggression and behavioural dominance among four sympatric species of shrews. Can. J. Zool. 84, 434–448.
Shier, D.M., Randall, JA, 2007. Use of different signaling modalities to communicate status by dominant and subordinate Heermann’s kangaroo rats (Dipodomys heermanni). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 61, 1023–1032.
Shizuka, D., McDonald, D.B., 2012. A social network perspective on measurements of dominance hierarchies. Anim. Behav. 83, 925–934.
Sichilima, A.M., Bennett, N.C., Faulkes, C.G., Le Comber, S.C., 2008. Evolution of African mole-rat sociality: burrow architecture, rainfall and foraging in colonies of the cooperatively breeding Fukomys mechowii. J. Zool. 275, 276–282.
Sikes, R.S., Gannon, W.L., the Animal Care Use Committee of the American Society of Mammalogists, 2011. Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. J. Mammal. 92, 235–253.
Solomon, N.G., 2003. A reexamination of factors influencing philopatry in rodents. J. Mammal. 84, 1182–1197.
Stamps, JA, Krishnan, V.V., 1994. Territory acquisition in lizards: II. Establishing social and spatial relationships. Anim. Behav. 47, 1387–1400.
Templeton, A.R., 2006. Population Genetics and Microevolutionary Theory. John Wiley & Sons, InC., Hoboken, New Jersey.
Wilcoxon, F., 1945. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics 1, 80–83.
Wilson, E.O., 1975. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. The Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Wittig, R.M., Boesch, C., 2003. Food competition and linear dominance hierarchy among female chimpanzees of the Tai National Park. Int. J. Primatol. 23, 759–783.
Yoerg, S.I., Shier, D.M., 2000. Captive breeding and anti-predator behavior of the Heermann’s kangaroo rat (Dipodomys heermanni). In: Final Report. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, pp. 1–56.
Yoerg, S.I., 1999. Solitary is not asocial: effects of social contact in kangaroo rats (Heteromyidae: Dipodomys heermanni). Ethology 105, 317–333.
de Waal, F.B.M., Tyack, P.L., 2003. Animal Social Complexity: Intelligence, Culture and Individualized Societies. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Aguilera-Miller, E.F., Lim, B.K., Murphy, R.W. et al. Dominance by extremely high aggressive behaviors in relation to genetic microstructure in matrilines. Mamm Biol 89, 1–6 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2017.12.001
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mambio.2017.12.001