Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A key element in the theory is the domain of danger, the area of ground in which every point is nearer to a particular individual than to any other individual. Such antipredator behavior inevitably results in aggregations. The theory was proposed by W. D. Hamilton in 1971 to explain the gregarious behavior of a variety of animals. [1]
Males are more dominant than females, and they possess more political power and occupy higher status positions illustrating the iron law of androcracy. [18] As a role gets more powerful, Putnam ’s law of increasing disproportion [ 19 ] becomes applicable and the probability the role is occupied by a hegemonic group member increases.
A high-ranking male mandrill advertises his status with bright facial coloration. [1]In the zoological field of ethology, a dominance hierarchy (formerly and colloquially called a pecking order) is a type of social hierarchy that arises when members of animal social groups interact, creating a ranking system.
Shimmering behaviour of Apis dorsata (giant honeybees). A group of animals fleeing from a predator shows the nature of herd behavior, for example in 1971, in the oft-cited article "Geometry for the Selfish Herd", evolutionary biologist W. D. Hamilton asserted that each individual group member reduces the danger to itself by moving as close as possible to the center of the fleeing group.
Personality in animals has been investigated across a variety of different scientific fields including agricultural science, animal behaviour, anthropology, psychology, veterinary medicine, and zoology. [1] Thus, the definition for animal personality may vary according to the context and scope of study.
The declaration condemns “unnecessary” harm to animals. But some animal advocates refused to sign on, claiming that the declaration did not go far enough, since it avoided the language of rights.
The study included an experiment in which a subordinate animal was allowed to choose between food that a dominant animal could also see and food that it could not; those who were subject to aggressive behaviour selected the food that the dominant animal could not see, suggesting that they are able to perceive a threat based on being within the ...
[37] Another definition is that a dominant animal has "priority of access to resources". [37] Dominance is a relative attribute, not absolute; there is no reason to assume that a high-ranking individual in one group would also become high ranking if moved to another. Nor is there any good evidence that "dominance" is a lifelong character trait.