首页> 外文期刊>Animal behaviour >Difficulties Remain In Distinguishing Between Mutual And Self-assessment In Animal Contests
【24h】

Difficulties Remain In Distinguishing Between Mutual And Self-assessment In Animal Contests

机译:动物比赛中相互评估和自我评估之间仍然存在困难

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Different theoretical models of contest behaviour are based on different assumptions about what information is used by the opponents. An approach adopted in many empirical studies has been to test predictions about relationships between 'resource-holding potential' (RHP) and contest duration, to determine whether fighting animals assess information about the opponent's RHP or whether they base their decisions only on what they know about their own RHP. Here we show that these two alternatives cannot be distinguished by analysis of RHP measures and contest duration alone and highlight the need to analyse further parameters of contests such as temporal changes in the intensity of agonistic behaviour.rnContests, where individuals compete aggressively and directly against one another, can be considered ubiquitous across animal taxa. Agonistic behaviours that are used during contests are often the result of sexual selection but can also occur over essential resources other than mates such as food, territory or shelter. Since they rarely involve injuries so severe that one of the opponents is compelled to stop fighting, they are settled in most cases by a decision on the part of one opponent, the loser, to 'give up' orrnwithdraw from the contest.
机译:竞赛行为的不同理论模型基于对对手使用哪些信息的不同假设。许多经验研究采用的方法是测试有关“资源持有潜力”(RHP)与比赛持续时间之间关系的预测,以确定战斗动物是否评估有关对手RHP的信息,或者它们是否仅根据自己知道的知识做出决定关于他们自己的RHP。在这里,我们证明了仅通过RHP措施和竞赛持续时间的分析就无法区分这两种选择,并强调需要分析竞赛的其他参数,例如激动行为强度的时间变化。另一个,可以认为在动物分类中无处不在。比赛期间使用的激动行为通常是性选择的结果,但也可能发生在诸如食物,领土或庇护所之类的伴侣以外的重要资源上。由于他们很少遭受如此严重的伤害,以致于对手中的一个被迫停止战斗,因此在大多数情况下,他们是由一名对手(即失败者)做出“放弃”或退出比赛的决定来解决的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号