Scent marking in wild banded mongooses: 2. Intrasexual overmarking and competition between males

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 81, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 43-50

  Jordan, Neil R ^a   Mwanguhya, Francis ^a,b,e   Furrer, Roman D ^c   Kyabulima, Solomon ^a,b,e   Rüedi, Peter ^c   Cant, Michael A ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b QENP   (Uganda)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

^e Queen Elizabeth National Park   (Uganda)

Author keywords

Banded mongoose; Communication; Competition; Mating success; Mungos mungo; Olfaction; Overmark; Scent mark; Sexual selection

Indexed keywords

MALE BEHAVIOR; MAMMAL; MATE CHOICE; MATE GUARDING; MATING SUCCESS; OLFACTION; SCENT MARKING; SEXUAL DIMORPHISM; SEXUAL SELECTION; WEAPONRY;

ANIMALIA; AVES; CARNIVORA; HERPESTIDAE; MAMMALIA; MUNGOS MUNGO; RODENTIA;

EID: 78650217004     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.07.009     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Altmann J. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour 1974, 69:227-267.
2. Blumstein D.T., Daniel J.C. Yellow-bellied marmots discriminate between the alarm calls of individuals and are more responsive to the calls from pups. Animal Behaviour 2004, 68:1257-1265.
3. Social Odours in Mammals. Vol. 1 1985, Oxford University Press, Oxford. R.E. Brown, D.W. Macdonald (Eds.).
4. Buesching C.D., Waterhouse J.S., Macdonald D.W. Gas-chromatographic analyses of the subcaudal gland secretion of the European badger (Meles meles). Part I. Chemical differences related to individual parameters. Journal of Chemical Ecology 2002, 28:41-56.
5. Buesching C.D., Waterhouse J.S., Macdonald D.W. Gas-chromatographic analyses of the subcaudal gland secretion of the European badger (Meles meles). Part II. Time-related variation in the individual-specific composition. Journal of Chemical Ecology 2002, 28:57-70.
6. Cant M.A. Social control of reproduction in banded mongooses. Animal Behaviour 2000, 59:147-158.
7. Cant M.A., Hodge S.J., Bell M.B.V., Gilchrist J.S., Nichols H.J. Reproductive control via eviction (but not the threat of eviction) in banded mongooses. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 2010, 277:2219-2226.
8. Dale J., Lank D.B., Reeve H.K. Signaling individuals identity versus quality: a model and case studies with ruffs, queleas, and house finches. American Naturalist 2001, 158:75-86.
9. Evans C.S. Referential communication. Perspectives in Ethology 1997, 12:99-143.
10. Ferkin M.H. Effects of previous interactions and sex on over-marking in meadow voles. Behaviour 2007, 144:1297-1313.
11. Fisher H.S., Swaisgood R.R., Fitch-Snyder H. Counter-marking by male pygmy lorises (Nycticebus pygmaeus): do females use odor cues to select mates with high competitive ability?. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2003, 53:425-426.
12. Gosling L.M., McKay H.V. Competitor assessment by scent matching: an experimental test. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 1990, 26:415-420.
13. Gosling L.M., Roberts S.C. Scent-marking by male mammals: cheat-proof signals to competitors and mates. Advances in the Study of Behavior 2001, 30:169-217.
14. Gosling L.M., Roberts S.C., Thornton E.A., Andrew M.J. Life history costs of olfactory status signalling in mice. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 2000, 48:328-332.
15. Hodge, S. J. 2003. The evolution of cooperation in the communal breeding banded mongoose. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge.
16. Johnson R.P. Scent marking in mammals. Animal Behaviour 1973, 21:521-535.
17. Johnston R.E. Memory for individual scent in hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) as assessed by habituation methods. Journal of Comparative Psychology 1993, 107:201-207.
18. Johnston R.E., Chaing G., Tung C. The information in scent over-marks of golden hamsters. Animal Behaviour 1994, 48:323-330.
19. Johnston R.E., Munver R., Tung C. Scent counter marks: selective memory for the top scent by golden hamsters. Animal Behaviour 1995, 49:1435-1442.
20. Johnston R.E., Sorokin E.S., Ferkin M.H. Female voles discriminate males' over-marks and prefer top-scent males. Animal Behaviour 1997, 54:679-690.
21. Jordan N.R., Mwanguhya F., Kyabulima S., Rüedi P., Cant M.A. Scent marking within and between groups of wild banded mongooses. Journal of Zoology 2010, 280:72-83.
22. Jordan N.R., Manser M.B., Mwanguhya F., Kyabulima S., Rüedi P., Cant M.A. Scent marking in wild banded mongooses. 1: Sex-specific scents and overmarking. Animal Behaviour 2011, 81:31-42.
23. Kaiser H.F. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960, 20:141-151.
24. McCulloch S., Pomeroy P.P., Slater P.J.B. Individually distinctive pup vocalizations fail to prevent allo-suckling in grey seals. Canadian Journal of Zoology 1999, 77:716-723.
25. Müller C.A., Manser M.B. Scent-marking and intrasexual competition in a cooperative carnivore with low reproductive skew. Ethology 2008, 114:174-185.
26. Müller C.A., Manser M.B. Mutual recognition of pups and providers in the cooperatively breeding banded mongoose. Animal Behaviour 2008, 75:1683-1692.
27. Nakagawa S., Ockendon N., Gillespie D.O.S., Hatchwell B.J., Burke T. Assessing the function of house sparrows' bib size using a flexible meta-analysis method. Behavioral Ecology 2007, 18:831-840.
28. Nichols, H. J., Amos, W. A., Bell, M. B. V., Cant, M. A. & Hodge, S. J. 2010. Top males gain high reproductive success by guarding more successful females in a cooperative mongoose. Animal Behaviour, 80, 649-657.
29. Penn D.J., Potts W.K. Chemical signals and parasite-mediated sexual selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 1998, 13:391-396.
30. Penn D.J., Potts W.K. Untrained mice discriminate MHC-determined odors. Physiology and Behavior 1998, 63:235-243.
31. Petrie M., Halliday T., Sanders C. Peahens prefer peacocks with elaborate trains. Animal Behaviour 1991, 41:323-331.
32. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2008, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org.
33. Ralls K. Mammalian scent marking. Science 1971, 171:443-449.
34. Rich T.J., Hurst J.L. Scent marks as reliable signals of the competitive ability of mates. Animal Behaviour 1998, 56:727-735.
35. Rich T.J., Hurst J.L. The competing countermarks hypothesis: reliable assessment of competitive ability by potential mates. Animal Behaviour 1999, 58:1027-1037.
36. Roberts S.C. Scent-marking. Rodent Societies 2007, 255-266. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. J.O. Wolff, P.W. Sherman (Eds.).
37. Rood J.P. Population dynamics and food habits of the banded mongoose. East African Wildlife Journal 1975, 13:89-111.
38. Thomas S.A. Scent marking and mate choice in the prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster. Animal Behaviour 2002, 63:1121-1127.
39. Thomas S.A., Kaczmarek B.K. Scent marking behaviour by male prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster in response to the scent of opposite- and same-sex conspecifics. Behavioural Processes 2002, 60:27-33.
40. Viitala J., Korpimaki E., Palokangas P., Koivula M. Attraction of kestrels to vole scent marks visible in ultraviolet light. Nature 1995, 373:425-427.
41. Zahavi A. Mate selection: a selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology 1975, 53:205-214.