Dear enemy relationships in the subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum: The role of memory of familiar odours

Animal Behaviour

Volumn 79, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1247-1255

  Zenuto, Roxana R ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE MAR DEL PLATA   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Aggression; Ctenomys talarum; Dear enemy relationship; Familiarity; Memory; Odour cues; Tala's tuco tuco; Territoriality

Indexed keywords

AGGRESSION; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FAMILIARITY; FITNESS; LABORATORY METHOD; MEMORY; ODOR; RECOGNITION; RODENT; SUBTERRANEAN ENVIRONMENT; TERRITORIALITY; TERRITORY;

ANIMALIA; CTENOMYIDAE; CTENOMYS TALARUM; RODENTIA;

EID: 79952538170     PISSN: 00033472     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.02.024     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Antinuchi, C. D., Zenuto, R., Luna, F., Cutrera, A. P., Perisinotti, P. & Busch, C. 2007. Energy budget in subterranean rodents. Insights from the tuco-tuco Ctenomys talarum (Rodentia: Ctenomidae). In: Essays in Honor of Oliver Pearson (Ed. by D. Kelt), pp. 111-139. California: University of California Publications in Zoology Series.
2. Arnott, G. & Elwood, R. E. 2009. Assessment of fighting ability in animal contests. Animal Behaviour, 77, 991-1004.
3. ASAB/ABS 2003. Guidelines for the treatment of animals in behavioural research and teaching. Animal Behaviour, 65, 249-255.
4. del Barco-Trillo, J., McPhee, M. E. & Johnston, R. E. 2009. Nonagonistic familiarity decreases aggression in male Turkish hamsters, Mesocricetus brandti. Animal Behaviour, 77, 389-393.
5. Beauchamp, G. K. & Wellington, J. L. 1984. Habituation to individual odors occurs following brief, widely-spaced presentations. Physiology & Behavior, 32, 511-514.
6. Bradbury, J. W. & Vehrencamp, S. L. 1998. Principles of Animal Communication. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer.
7. Busch, C., Malizia, A. I., Scaglia, O. A. & Reig, O. A. 1989. Spatial distribution and attributes of a population of Ctenomys talarum (Rodentia: Octodontidae). Journal of Mammalogy, 70, 204-208.
8. Busch, C., Antinuchi, C. D., Del Valle, J. C., Kittlein, M. J., Malizia, A. I., Vassallo, A. I. & Zenuto, R. 2000. Population ecology of subterranean rodents. In: Life Underground: the Biology of Subterranean Rodents (Ed. by E. A. Lacey, J. L. Patton & G. N. Cameron), pp. 183-226. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9. Davis, M. S. 1987. Acoustically mediated neighbor recognition in the North American bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 21, 185-190.
10. Cutrera, A. P., Antinuchi, C. D., Mora, M. S. & Vassallo, A. I. 2006. Home-range and activity patterns of the South American subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum. Journal of Mammalogy, 87, 183-1191.
11. Fanjul, M. S., Zenuto, R. R. & Busch, C. 2003. Use of olfaction for sexual recognition in the subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum. Acta Theriologica, 148, 35-46.
12. Ferkin, M. H. 1988. The effect of familiarity on social interactions in meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus: a laboratory and field study. Animal Behaviour, 36, 1816-1822.
13. Fisher, J. 1954. Evolution and bird sociality. In: Evolution as a Process (Ed. by J. Huxley, A. C. Hardy & E. B. Ford), pp. 71-83. London: Allen & Unwin.
14. Fox, S. F. & Baird, T. A. 1992. The dear enemy phenomenon in the collared lizard, Crotaphytus collaris, with a cautionary note on experimental methodology. Animal Behaviour, 44, 780-782.
15. Franchescoli, G. 2000. Sensory capabilities and communication. In: Life Underground: the Biology of Subterranean Rodents (Ed. by E. A. Lacey, J. L. Patton & G. N. Cameron), pp. 111-144. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16. Getty, T. 1989. Are dear enemies in a 'war of attrition'? Animal Behaviour, 37, 337-339.
17. Gheusi, G., Goodall, G. & Dantzer, R. 1997. Individually distinctive odours represent individual conspecifics in rats. Animal Behaviour, 53, 935-944.
18. Gosling, L. M. 1986. Economic consequences of scent marking in mammalian territoriality. In: Chemical Signals in Vertebrates. Vol. 4 (Ed. by D. Duvall, D. Müller-Schwartze & R. M. Silverstein), pp. 385-395. New York: Plenum.
19. Gosling, L. M. 1990. Scent marking by resource holders: an alternative mechanism for advertising the costs of competition. In: Chemical Signals in Vertebrates. Vol. 5 (Ed. by D. W. Macdonald, S. Natynczuk & D. Müller-Schwartze), pp. 315-328. Oxford: University Press.
20. Gosling, L. M. & McKay, H. V. 1990. Competitor assessment by scent matching: an experimental test. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 26, 415-420.
21. Gromov, V. S., Krasnov, B. R. & Shenbrot, G. I. 2001. Behavioural correlates of spatial distribution inWagner's gerbil Gerbillus dasyurus (Rodentia, Gerbillinae). Mammalia, 65, 111-120.
22. Halpin, Z. T. 1974. Individual differences in the biological odours of the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus). Behavioral Biology, 11, 253-259.
23. Halpin, Z. T. 1980. Individual odors and individual recognition: review and commentary. Biology and Behavior, 5, 233-248.
24. Halpin, Z. T. 1986. Individuals among mammals: origins and functions. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 16, 39-70.
25. Hyman, J. 2005. Seasonal variation in response to neighbors and strangers by a territorial songbird. Ethology, 111, 951-961.
26. Jaeger, R. G. 1981. Dear enemy recognition and the costs of aggression between salamanders. American Naturalist, 117, 962-974.
27. Johnston, R. E. 1993. Memory for individual scent in hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) as assessed by habituation methods. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 107, 201-207.
28. Johnston, R. E. & Bullock, T. A. 2001. Individual recognition by use of odours in golden hamsters: the nature of individual presentation. Animal Behaviour, 61, 545-557.
29. Johnston, R. E. & Jernigan, P. 1994. Golden hamsters recognize individuals, not just individual scents. Animal Behaviour, 47, 129-136.
30. Johnston, R. E. & Peng, A. 2008. Memory for individuals: hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) require contact to develop multicomponent representations (concepts) of others. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 122, 121-131.
31. Kogan, J. H., Frankland, P. W. & Silva, A. J. 2000. Long-term memory underlying hippocampus-dependent social recognition in mice. Hippocampus, 10, 47-56.
32. Kokko, H., López-Sepulcre, A. & Morrell, L. J. 2006. From hawks and doves to selfconsistent games of territorial behavior. American Naturalist, 167, 901-912.
33. Lachish, S. & Goldizen, A. W. 2004. Responses to neighbours and non-neighbours in the buff-banded rail (Gallirallus philippensis): no dear-enemy relationships. Australian Journal of Zoology, 52, 369-378.
34. Lai, W. S. & Johnston, R. E. 2002. Individual recognition after fighting by golden hamsters: a new method. Physiology & Behavior, 76, 225-239.
35. Lai, W. S., Ramiro, L. L. R., Yu, H. A. & Johnston, R. E. 2005. Recognition of familiar individuals in golden hamsters: a new method and functional neuroanatomy. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 11239-11247.
36. Leiser, J. K. 2003. When are neighbours 'dear enemies' and when are they not? The responses of territorial male variegated pupfish, Cyprinodon variegatus, to neighbours, strangers and heterospecifics. Animal Behaviour, 65, 453-462.
37. López, P. & Martín, J. 2002. Chemical rival recognition decreases aggression levels in male Iberian wall lizards, Podarcis hispanica. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 51, 461-465.
38. Luna, F. & Antinuchi, C. D. 2006. Cost of foraging in the subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum: effect of soil hardness. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 84, 661-667.
39. Luna, F., Antinuchi, C. D. & Busch, C. 2000. Ritmos de actividad locomotora y uso de las cuevas en condiciones seminaturales en Ctenomys talarum (Rodentia, Octodontidae). Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 73, 39-46.
40. Mackin, W. 2005. Neighbor-stranger discrimination in Audobon's shearwater (Puffinus l. lherminieri) explained by a 'real enemy' effect. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 59, 326-332.
41. Malizia, A. I., Zenuto, R. & Busch, C. 1995. Demographic and reproductive attributes of dispersers in two populations of Ctenomys talarum. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 73, 732-738.
42. Müller, C. A. & Manser, M. B. 2007. 'Nasty neighbours' rather than 'dear enemies' in a social carnivore. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 274, 959-965.
43. Paz y Miño, C. & Tang-Martínez, Z. 1999. Effects of exposures to siblings or sibling odors on sibling recognition in prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 77, 118-123.
44. Petrulis, A., Weidner, M. & Johnston, R. E. 2004. Recognition of competitors by male golden hamsters. Physiology & Behavior, 81, 629-638.
45. Rice, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution, 43, 223-225.
46. Rosell, F. & Bjørkøyli, T. 2002. A test of the dear enemy phenomenon in the Eurasian beaver. Animal Behaviour, 63, 1073-1078.
47. Rosell, F., Gundersen, G. & Le Galliard, J. F. 2008. Territory ownership and familiarity status affect how much male root voles (Microtus oeconomus) invest in territory defence. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 62, 1559-1568.
48. Schleich, C. E. & Busch, C. 2002. Acoustic signals of a solitary subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum (Rodentia: Ctenomyidae): physical characteristics and behavioural correlates. Journal of Ethology, 20, 123-131.
49. Stoddard, P. K., Beecher, M. D., Horning, C. L. & Willis, M. S. 1990. Strong neighbor-stranger discrimination in song sparrows. Condor, 92, 1051-1056.
50. Swaisgood, R. R., Lindburg, D. G. & Zhou, X. 1999. Giant pandas discriminate individual differences in conspecific scent. Animal Behaviour, 57, 1045-1053.
51. Temeles, E. J. 1989. The effect of prey consumption on territorial defense by harriers: differential responses to neighbors versus floaters. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 24, 239-243.
52. Temeles, E. J. 1994. The role of neighbours in territorial systems: when are they 'dear enemies'? Animal Behaviour, 47, 339-350.
53. Thomas, O. 1898. Descriptions of two new Argentine rodents. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series, 7 (1), 283-286.
54. Trigosso-Venario, R., Labra, A. & Niemeyer, H. M. 2002. Interactions between males of the lizard Liolaemus tenuis: roles of familiarity and memory. Ethology, 108, 1057-1064.
55. Vaché, M., Ferron, J. & Gouat, P. 2001. The ability of red squirrels (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) to discriminate conspecific olfactory signatures. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 79, 1296-1300.
56. Vestal, B. M. & Hellack, J. J. 1978. Comparison of neighbor recognition in two species of deer mice (Peromyscus). Journal of Mammalogy, 59, 339-346.
57. Wilson, E. O. 1975. Sociobiology: the New Synthesis. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
58. Woods, C. A. 1993. Suborder Hystricognathi. In: Mammal Species of the World: a Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (Ed. by D. E. Wilson & D. M. Reeder), pp. 771-806. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press.
59. Ydenberg, R. C., Giraldeau, L.-A. & Falls, J. B. 1988. Neighbours, strangers, and the asymmetric war of attrition. Animal Behaviour, 36, 343-347.
60. Zar, J. H. 2009. Biostatistical Analysis. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
61. Zenuto, R. R. & Fanjul, M. S. 2002. Olfactory discrimination of individual scents in the subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum (tuco-tuco). Ethology, 108, 629-641.
62. Zenuto, R. R., Lacey, E. A. & Busch, C. 1999. DNA fingerprinting reveals polygyny in the subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum. Molecular Ecology, 8, 1529-1532.
63. Zenuto, R. R., Vasallo, A. I. & Busch, C. 2002. Comportamiento social y reproductivo del roedor subterráneo solitario Ctenomys talarum (Rodentia: Ctenomydae) en condiciones de semicautiverio. Revista Chilena de Historia Natural, 75, 165-177.
64. Zenuto, R. R., Fanjul, M. S. & Busch, C. 2004. Subterranean rodent Ctenomys talarum (tuco-tuco) use chemical communication during breeding season. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 30, 2111-2126.