Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T02:26:08.272Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Credible signalling and social bonds: Ultimately drawing on the same idea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2021

Patrick Kennedy Open the ORCID record for Patrick Kennedy [Opens in a new window]  and
Andrew N. Radford Open the ORCID record for Andrew N. Radford [Opens in a new window]
Patrick Kennedy
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, BristolBS8 1TQ, UK. [email protected] [email protected]; http://www.bio.bris.ac.uk/research/behavior/Vocal_Communication/home.html
Andrew N. Radford
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, BristolBS8 1TQ, UK. [email protected] [email protected]; http://www.bio.bris.ac.uk/research/behavior/Vocal_Communication/home.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The hypotheses in both target articles rely implicitly on much the same logic. For a “social-bonding” device to make sense, there must be an underlying reason why an otherwise-arbitrary behaviour sustains alliances – namely, credible signals of one's value to partners. To illustrate our points, we draw on the parallels with supposed bonding behaviours in nonhuman animals.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 44 , 2021 , e102
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akinyi, M. Y., Tung, J., Jeneby, M., Patel, N. B., Altmann, J., & Alberts, S. C. (2013). Role of grooming in reducing tick load in wild baboons (Papio cynocephalus). Animal Behaviour, 85(3), 559–568. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.12.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basolo, A. L. (1995). Phylogenetic evidence for the role of a pre-existing bias in sexual selection. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 259(1356), 307–311. doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0045.Google ScholarPubMed
Biernaskie, J. M., Perry, J. C., & Grafen, A. (2018). A general model of biological signals, from cues to handicaps. Evolution Letters, 2(3), 201–209. doi:10.1002/evl3.57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birch, G., Cant, M. A., & Thompson, F. J. (2019). Behavioural response of workers to repeated intergroup encounters in the harvester ant Messor barbarus. Insectes Sociaux, 66(3), 491–500. doi:10.1007/s00040-019-00710-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borgeaud, C., & Bshary, R. (2015). Wild vervet monkeys trade tolerance and specific coalitionary support for grooming in experimentally induced conflicts. Current Biology, 25(22), 3011–3016. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.10.016.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braune, P., Schmidt, S., & Zimmermann, E. (2005). Spacing and group coordination in a nocturnal primate, the golden brown mouse lemur (Microcebus ravelobensis): The role of olfactory and acoustic signals. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 58(6), 587–596. doi:10.1007/s00265-005-0944-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruintjes, R., Lynton-Jenkins, J., Jones, J. W., & Radford, A. N. (2015). Out-group threat promotes within-group affiliation in a cooperative fish. The American Naturalist, 187(2), 274–282. doi:10.1086/684411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, K. L., & Catchpole, C. K. (2000). Song as an indicator of male parental effort in the sedge warbler. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 267(1441), 321–326. doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, C., Kern, J. M., Bennitt, E., & Radford, A. N. (2016). Rival group scent induces changes in dwarf mongoose immediate behavior and subsequent movement. Behavioral Ecology, 27(6), 1627–1634. doi:10.1093/beheco/arw092.Google Scholar
Dixit, A., & Nalebuff, B. (1991). Thinking strategically. W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Dunbar, R. I. M. (2012). On the evolutionary function of song and dance. In Bannan, N. (Ed.), Music, language, and human evolution (pp. 201–214). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henkel, S., & Setchell, J. M. (2018). Group and kin recognition via olfactory cues in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285(1889), 20181527. doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, S. L., Jablonski, P., & Brown, J. L. (2001). Recognition of group membership by voice in Mexican jays, Aphelocoma ultramarina. Animal Behaviour, 62(2), 297–303. doi:10.1006/anbe.2001.1745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, J. M., & Radford, A. N. (2018). Experimental evidence for delayed contingent cooperation among wild dwarf mongooses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(24), 6255–6260. doi:10.1073/pnas.1801000115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mooring, M. S., Blumstein, D. T., & Stoner, C. J. (2004). The evolution of parasite-defence grooming in ungulates. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 81(1), 17–37. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2004.00273.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostner, J., & Schülke, O. (2014). The evolution of social bonds in primate males. Behaviour, 151(7), 871–906. doi:10.1163/1568539X-00003191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettitt, B. A., Bourne, G. R., & Bee, M. A. (2020). Females prefer the calls of better fathers in a Neotropical frog with biparental care. Behavioral Ecology, 31(1), 152–163. doi:10.1093/beheco/arz172.Google Scholar
Radford, A. N. (2004). Vocal coordination of group movement by green woodhoopoes (Phoeniculus purpureus). Ethology, 110(1), 11–20. doi:10.1046/j.1439-0310.2003.00943.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radford, A. N. (2005). Group-specific vocal signatures and neighbour-stranger discrimination in the cooperatively breeding green woodhoopoe. Animal Behaviour, 70(5), 1227–1234. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.04.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radford, A. N. (2011). Preparing for battle? Potential intergroup conflict promotes current intragroup affiliation. Biology Letters, 7, 26–29. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2010.0507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radford, A. N., & Du Plessis, M. A. (2006). Dual function of allopreening in the cooperatively breeding green woodhoopoe, Phoeniculus purpureus. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 61(2), 221–230. doi:10.1007/s00265-006-0253-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radford, A. N., & Ridley, A. R. (2006). Recruitment calling: A novel form of extended parental care in an altricial species. Current Biology, 16(17), 1700–1704. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2006.06.053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Zweden, J. S., & D'Ettorre, P. (2010). Nestmate recognition in social insects and the role of hydrocarbons. In Blomquist, G. J. & Bagnères, A.-G. (Eds.), Insect hydrocarbons biology, biochemistry, and chemical ecology (pp. 222–243). Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511711909.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar