Group living

Last updated

In ethology and evolutionary biology, group living is defined as individuals of the same species (conspecifics), maintaining spatial proximity with one another over time with mechanisms of social attraction. [1] Solitary life in animals is considered to be the ancestral state of living; and group living has thus evolved independently in many species of animals. [2] Therefore, species that form groups through social interaction will result in a group of individuals that gain an evolutionary advantage, such as increased protection against predators, access to potential mates, increased foraging efficiency and the access to social information.

Contents

Important aspects of group living include the frequency and type of social interactions (egoistic, cooperative, altruistic, revengeful) between individuals of a group (social life), the group size, and the organization of group members in the group.

Terminology of animal groups also varies among different taxonomic groups. Groups of sheep are termed herds, whilst groups of birds are referred to as colonies, or flocks.

Most studies on group living focus strictly on groups comprising a single species. However, many mixed-species groups commonly occur in nature. Examples of mixed-species groups include wildebeests forming groups with zebras, [3] and different species of birds that form large foraging flocks. [4]

Group living may sometimes be confused with collective animal behavior. Collective animal behavior is the study of how the interactions between individuals of a group give rise to group level patterns and how these patterns have evolved. [5] Examples include the marching of locusts and flocks of migrating birds. Group living however focuses on the long-term social interactions between individuals of a group and how animals have evolved from solitary living.

Definition of group living

It is extremely difficult to distinguish between solitary living and group living. Distinctions between the two are relatively artificial. [6] This is because many species of animals who spend a majority of their life alone, at some point in their life, will join a group or engage in social behavior. [7] Some examples of this happens during mating, parental care of their offspring, or even aggregations of conspecifics to an area to exploit resources of food or shelter. [2] Therefore, multiple definitions of group living have been proposed. Differences in group living definitions vary dependent on the frequency and type of social interactions that members of a group display and the level of coordination and cohesion of group members. [6] For example, Wilson (2000) [8] defines a group as “any set of organisms, belonging to the same species, that remain together for a period of time while interacting with one another to a distinctly greater degree than with other conspecific organisms." This definition cannot be applied to situations such as moths drawn to a lamp, or when animals aggregate around a watering hole, [1] as they are not exampling of a social aggregation. Most definitions however agree that a fundamental characteristic of group living is that individuals need to show spatial proximity over time to be considered a group. [2] Therefore, the working definition of group living is where two or more individuals display a degree of spatial proximity over time, emphasizing the importance of mechanisms of social attraction to maintain these groups. [9] [1]

Evolution of group living

There have been multiple different hypotheses proposed to explain how group living evolved in animals. Research shows that grouping habits may differ between individuals, and this tendency to group can be inherited. Research also shows that grouping tendency depends heavily on the interaction of many genes, as well as experiences gained by an individual and the environmental conditions surrounding the individual. [1] Other studies argue that the main driving force of the evolution of social grouping is phylogenetic inertia alongside ecological pressure. [8] However, it is still unclear how exactly animals have evolved from the ancestral state of solitary life.

Benefits of group living

Information access and transfer

A key advantage to group living is the ability for individuals in a group to access information gained by other group members. [1] This ability to share information can benefit many aspects of a group’s success, such as increased foraging efficiency and increased defenses against predators.

Foraging efficiency

An advantage of information access from group living is increased foraging efficiency. When individuals form a group, they can more effectively locate high quality resources in their environment. Foraging efficiency can be increased by the sheer area of space individuals occupy as well as a greater number of individuals searching for food. [10] [11] Once a high-quality resource is found, the individuals may produce signals or cues that guides other members of the group to the location of the resource. [1] The cues and signals produced thus helps individuals of a group discriminate between low- and high-quality resources. An example of this information transfer to benefit foraging efficiency can be seen in honey-bee (Apis mellifera) colonies, in which waggle dances performed by honey-bees share information on where these dancing bees foraged nectar. The waggle dance thus guides other bees to the location of highly productive flowers. [12] [13] In some species, for instance the forest tent caterpillar (Malacosoma disstria), foraging behaviors change depending on food source. On less favorable food sources, caterpillar groups tend to splinter, thereby potentially increasing the risk for predation, but increasing the potential of finding a more favorable food source. [14]

Increased defense from predators

Another advantage of living in a group is seen in many prey species in their ability to increase defenses against predatory animals.

A way that a group may increase its defenses against predators is through the ‘many-eyes effect’. This effect states that larger groups of animals are better at detecting predators compared to smaller groups. [15] This allows the individuals within a group to more effectively identify predators, allowing these individuals to flee or adopt postures to alert the predators that their presence is known. An example can be seen in a study conducted by Siegfried and Underhill (1975) [16] on laughing doves, in which large groups react to a mock-predator much more rapidly than smaller groups.

Another way in which a group may have decreased risk of predation is through the dilution effect. [5] The dilution effect shows the idea that an individual in a large group will have a reduced risk of predation compared to an individual in a small group or a solitary individual. Hence the risk is ‘diluted’ among the other members in a group. It is important to note however; this effect only occurs where predators are unable to capture all individuals in a group. For example, a flock of birds preying on a large group of caterpillars will not have any dilution effect, as these birds can rapidly consume all caterpillars at once. [1] All individuals in a large group however, may not benefit from the dilution effect, and thus the selfish herd theory was developed. The selfish herd theory states that individuals in the periphery of a group is more likely to be preyed upon than those in the center of the group [17]

Breeding

It is hypothesized that reproductive success of a female is determined by the number of eggs she can produce, while reproductive success of a male is determined by the number of females he mates with. Furthermore, according to Bateman's principle, [18] it is expected that females of a population will select mates that result in the best quality offspring, while males compete among each other to mate with a female.

Group living provides the presence of social information within the group, allowing both male and female members to find and select potential mating partners. Alongside this, living in a group allows for higher reproductive success as individuals have access to a greater number of potential mates, and the possibility to choose between them. [1] Therefore, individuals living in groups have a higher chance of finding a mate and successfully reproducing, on the basis that larger groups present a greater number of accessible mates nearby.

Costs of group living

Despite the many benefits of living in groups, individuals of the group may also incur costs when forming groups.

Ectoparasitism and disease

When individuals of the same species aggregate to form groups, there is an increased risk of diseases and parasites spreading throughout the group. Because individuals of a group live together in close proximity, when one individual is infected with a disease or parasite, they bring this disease or parasite into a habitat full of susceptible individuals. [19] Also, larger groups of animals will produce larger amounts of waste material, allowing for a favorable environment for pathogens, that may spread to individuals. Thus, transmissions of diseases and parasites are more likely to occur and more rapidly than if an individual lived alone. A great example was shown in colonies of cliff swallows by Brown and Brown (1986). [20] Cliff swallows are commonly parasitized by swallow bugs and this study showed that the number of swallow bugs per nest increased significantly with an increase of the number of cliff swallows per colony, which thus reduced the survivability of the nests’ offspring by up to 50%. Another study shows that bank swallows have an increased likelihood of flea infestations per burrow with the increase of colony size, which also increased mortality rates of offspring in infected burrows. [21]

Intraspecific competition

A consequence that may arise from forming large groups is the increased intraspecific competition between group members. If resources in a group’s environment becomes limited, group members will then have to compete with one another for the available resources. [22] The increased competition then results in reduced nutritional intake in some individuals compared to others. An example of this can be seen in a study conducted on leaf monkeys. [23] This study showed that females in a larger group of leaf monkeys had a reduced energetic intake than females in groups of smaller sizes. The reduction in energy gain seen in females of the larger group also then negatively affected the development rates of any infant offspring. Therefore, despite the benefits of animals forming groups that increases foraging efficiency due to the presence of social information, [1] large groups of animals may also incur a cost of having to compete for the resources available in the environment.

Reproduction

Another cost to group living is the effect that a larger group size has on the reproductive success of individuals.

While forming groups may benefit the reproductive success of individuals as there are more potential mates, consequentially individuals may also have increased competition between one another to successfully find a mate and reproduce. [24] This means some individuals will have a reduction in their reproductive success as it now competes with other group members. An example can be seen in a study conducted on the Eurasian badger (Meles meles). [22] This study showed that females belonging to a large group of badgers had a higher failure rate of reproduction in comparison to badgers living in solitary. Therefore, some individuals may actually show reduced reproductive success while living in a group despite the increased presence of potential mates.

Stress

It is clear that animals that form groups need to maintain a group size around an optimal level. [25] Individual group members in group sizes much larger or smaller than the optimum may have increased stress levels. Individuals in groups much larger than their optimum group size may have increased stress levels due to competition for food resources or mates. In contrast, individuals in groups smaller than their optimum have increased stress levels arising from inadequate defense from predators. [26] An example of this can be seen in a study conducted on a species of ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta). [27] This study predicted that the optimum group size of ring-tailed lemurs is 10-20 individuals. The study then showed that groups within the optimum group size produced the lowest level of cortisol (an indicator of stress), while groups larger or smaller than the optimum group size had a significant increase in cortisol production. Therefore, group sizes that are not maintained within their optimum size may incur a cost of increased stress levels of individuals within those groups.  

Inbreeding

Another proposed cost of group living is the increased risk of inbreeding. [28] As members of the group in close proximity to one another over long periods of time, this increases the chances that offspring of the group may mate with related individuals. [29] Offspring resulting from inbreeding have an increased chance to be affected by recessive or deleterious traits, thus reducing its survivability and ability to reproduce. [30] The risk of inbreeding however, is only prevalent in smaller, isolated groups, as larger group sizes dilutes the chance of an individual mating with its relatives. [29]

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethology</span> Scientific objective study of animal behaviour

Ethology is the scientific study of animal behaviour, usually with a focus on behaviour under natural conditions, and viewing behaviour as an evolutionarily adaptive trait. Behaviourism as a term also describes the scientific and objective study of animal behaviour, usually referring to measured responses to stimuli or to trained behavioural responses in a laboratory context, without a particular emphasis on evolutionary adaptivity. Throughout history, different naturalists have studied aspects of animal behaviour. Ethology has its scientific roots in the work of Charles Darwin and of American and German ornithologists of the late 19th and early 20th century, including Charles O. Whitman, Oskar Heinroth, and Wallace Craig. The modern discipline of ethology is generally considered to have begun during the 1930s with the work of Dutch biologist Nikolaas Tinbergen and Austrian biologists Konrad Lorenz and Karl von Frisch, the three recipients of the 1973 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Ethology combines laboratory and field science, with a strong relation to some other disciplines such as neuroanatomy, ecology, and evolutionary biology. Ethologists typically show interest in a behavioural process rather than in a particular animal group, and often study one type of behaviour, such as aggression, in a number of unrelated species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Behavioral ecology</span> Study of the evolutionary basis for animal behavior due to ecological pressures

Behavioral ecology, also spelled behavioural ecology, is the study of the evolutionary basis for animal behavior due to ecological pressures. Behavioral ecology emerged from ethology after Niko Tinbergen outlined four questions to address when studying animal behaviors: What are the proximate causes, ontogeny, survival value, and phylogeny of a behavior?

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foraging</span> Searching for wild food resources

Foraging is searching for wild food resources. It affects an animal's fitness because it plays an important role in an animal's ability to survive and reproduce. Foraging theory is a branch of behavioral ecology that studies the foraging behavior of animals in response to the environment where the animal lives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Territory (animal)</span> Area a wild animal consistently defends

In ethology, territory is the sociographical area that an animal consistently defends against conspecific competition using agonistic behaviors or real physical aggression. Animals that actively defend territories in this way are referred to as being territorial or displaying territorialism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gray mouse lemur</span> Small primate from Madagascar

The gray mouse lemur, grey mouse lemur or lesser mouse lemur, is a small lemur, a type of strepsirrhine primate, found only on the island of Madagascar. Weighing 58 to 67 grams, it is the largest of the mouse lemurs, a group that includes the smallest primates in the world. The species is named for its mouse-like size and coloration and is known locally as tsidy, koitsiky, titilivaha, pondiky, and vakiandry. The gray mouse lemur and all other mouse lemurs are considered cryptic species, as they are nearly indistinguishable from each other by appearance. For this reason, the gray mouse lemur was considered the only mouse lemur species for decades until more recent studies began to distinguish between the species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Herd</span> Similar as Group

A herd is a social group of certain animals of the same species, either wild or domestic. The form of collective animal behavior associated with this is called herding. These animals are known as gregarious animals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dominance hierarchy</span> Type of social hierarchy

In biology, a dominance hierarchy is a type of social hierarchy that arises when members of animal social groups interact, creating a ranking system. A dominant higher-ranking individual is sometimes called an alpha, and the submissive lower-ranking individual a beta. Different types of interactions can result in dominance depending on the species, including ritualized displays of aggression or direct physical violence. In social living groups, members are likely to compete for access to limited resources and mating opportunities. Rather than fighting each time they meet, relative rank is established between individuals of the same sex, with higher-ranking individuals often gaining more access to resources and mates. Based on repetitive interactions, a social order is created that is subject to change each time a dominant animal is challenged by a subordinate one.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ruffed lemur</span> Genus of primates from Madagascar

The ruffed lemurs of the genus Varecia are strepsirrhine primates and the largest extant lemurs within the family Lemuridae. Like all living lemurs, they are found only on the island of Madagascar. Formerly considered to be a monotypic genus, two species are now recognized: the black-and-white ruffed lemur, with its three subspecies, and the red ruffed lemur.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pack hunter</span> Type of predatory animal

A pack hunter or social predator is a predatory animal which hunts its prey by working together with other members of its species. Normally animals hunting in this way are closely related, and with the exceptions of chimpanzees where only males normally hunt, all individuals in a family group contribute to hunting. When hunting cooperation is across two or more species, the broader term cooperative hunting is commonly used.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sociality</span> Form of collective animal behaviour

Sociality is the degree to which individuals in an animal population tend to associate in social groups (gregariousness) and form cooperative societies.

Cooperative breeding is a social system characterized by alloparental care: offspring receive care not only from their parents, but also from additional group members, often called helpers. Cooperative breeding encompasses a wide variety of group structures, from a breeding pair with helpers that are offspring from a previous season, to groups with multiple breeding males and females (polygynandry) and helpers that are the adult offspring of some but not all of the breeders in the group, to groups in which helpers sometimes achieve co-breeding status by producing their own offspring as part of the group's brood. Cooperative breeding occurs across taxonomic groups including birds, mammals, fish, and insects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parental care</span>

Parental care is a behavioural and evolutionary strategy adopted by some animals, involving a parental investment being made to the evolutionary fitness of offspring. Patterns of parental care are widespread and highly diverse across the animal kingdom. There is great variation in different animal groups in terms of how parents care for offspring, and the amount of resources invested by parents. For example, there may be considerable variation in the amount of care invested by each sex, where females may invest more in some species, males invest more in others, or investment may be shared equally. Numerous hypotheses have been proposed to describe this variation and patterns in parental care that exist between the sexes, as well as among species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eusociality</span> Highest level of animal sociality a species can attain

Eusociality, the highest level of organization of sociality, is defined by the following characteristics: cooperative brood care, overlapping generations within a colony of adults, and a division of labor into reproductive and non-reproductive groups. The division of labor creates specialized behavioral groups within an animal society which are sometimes referred to as 'castes'. Eusociality is distinguished from all other social systems because individuals of at least one caste usually lose the ability to perform at least one behavior characteristic of individuals in another caste. Eusocial colonies can be viewed as superorganisms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Collective animal behavior</span> Animal cognition

Collective animal behavior is a form of social behavior involving the coordinated behavior of large groups of similar animals as well as emergent properties of these groups. This can include the costs and benefits of group membership, the transfer of information, decision-making process, locomotion and synchronization of the group. Studying the principles of collective animal behavior has relevance to human engineering problems through the philosophy of biomimetics. For instance, determining the rules by which an individual animal navigates relative to its neighbors in a group can lead to advances in the deployment and control of groups of swimming or flying micro-robots such as UAVs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Black-and-white ruffed lemur</span> Species of lemur

The black-and-white ruffed lemur is an endangered species of ruffed lemur, one of two which are endemic to the island of Madagascar. Despite having a larger range than the red ruffed lemur, it has a much smaller population that is spread out, living in lower population densities and reproductively isolated. It also has less coverage and protection in large national parks than the red ruffed lemur. Three subspecies of black-and-white ruffed lemur have been recognized since the red ruffed lemur was elevated to species status in 2001.

Vigilance, in the field of behavioural ecology, refers to an animal's examination of its surroundings in order to heighten awareness of predator presence. Vigilance is an important behaviour during foraging as animals must often venture away from the safety of shelter to find food. However being vigilant comes at the expense of time spent feeding so there is a trade-off between the two. The length of time animals devote to vigilance is dependent on many factors including predation risk and hunger.

<i>Megalopta genalis</i> Species of bee

Megalopta genalis is a species of the family Halictidae, otherwise known as the sweat bees. The bee is native to Central and South America. Its eyes have anatomical adaptations that make them 27 times more sensitive to light than diurnal bees, giving it the ability to be nocturnal. However, its eyes are not completely different from other diurnal bees, but are still apposition compound eyes. The difference therefore lies purely in adaptations to become nocturnal, increasing the success of foraging and minimizing the danger of doing so from predation. This species has served as a model organism in studies of social behavior and night vision in bees.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Polyandry in nature</span>

In behavioral ecology, polyandry is a class of mating system where one female mates with several males in a breeding season. Polyandry is often compared to the polygyny system based on the cost and benefits incurred by members of each sex. Polygyny is where one male mates with several females in a breeding season . A common example of polyandrous mating can be found in the field cricket of the invertebrate order Orthoptera. Polyandrous behavior is also prominent in many other insect species, including the red flour beetle and the species of spider Stegodyphus lineatus. Polyandry also occurs in some primates such as marmosets, mammal groups, the marsupial genus' Antechinus and bandicoots, around 1% of all bird species, such as jacanas and dunnocks, insects such as honeybees, and fish such as pipefish.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Primate sociality</span>

Primate sociality is an area of primatology that aims to study the interactions between three main elements of a primate social network: the social organisation, the social structure and the mating system. The intersection of these three structures describe the socially complex behaviours and relationships occurring among adult males and females of a particular species. Cohesion and stability of groups are maintained through a confluence of factors, including: kinship, willingness to cooperate, frequency of agonistic behaviour, or varying intensities of dominance structures.

<i>Metepeira incrassata</i> Spider

Metepeira incrassata, also known as the colonial orb-weaving spider, belongs to the spider family Araneidae and genus Metepeira. They are most famous for their social organization and group living behavior. They are generally found in tropical rainforest and agricultural sites in Mexico, and their habitats tend to be highly productive. Their group sizes are relatively larger than other colonial spiders, typically ranging from hundreds to thousands of individuals. 99% of the females are observed to participate in colonial living, generally with at least two other individuals. Because most M. incrassata females are communal, the colonies are often dominated by larger males. There is minimal sexual dimorphism observed in M. incrassata. Unlike other orb-weaver spiders, M. incrassata builds a colonial web by connecting each spider's individual webs together through semi-permanent framelines. These colonial webs of M. incrassata are prone to invasion by kleptoparasitic and araneophagic spiders such as the Theridiidae family. The reproductive cycle of M. incrassata occurs throughout the entire year, with multiple generations sharing the same time period. Within their colonies, M. incrassata is seen to change locations. Larger, fertile females with egg sacs prefer to reside in the central area of the group for increased protection from predators, while the younger spiders are mostly found in peripheral positions. Larger adult M. incrassata are also known to finish web-building earlier than smaller ones, gaining an advantage in strategically positioning themselves.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ward, A. and Webster, M., 2016. Sociality: the behaviour of group-living animals. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
  2. 1 2 3 Majolo, Bonaventura & Huang, Pengzhen. (2017). Group living. 10.1007/978-3-319-47829-6_1865-1.
  3. ↑ Sinclair, A.R., 1985. Does interspecific competition or predation shape the African ungulate community?. The Journal of Animal Ecology, pp.899-918.
  4. ↑ Goodale, E., Ratnayake, C.P. and Kotagama, S.W., 2014. Vocal mimicry of alarm‐associated sounds by a drongo elicits flee and mobbing responses from other species that participate in mixed‐species bird flocks. Ethology, 120(3), pp.266-274.
  5. 1 2 Sumpter, D.J., 2010. Collective animal behavior. Princeton University Press.
  6. 1 2 Krause, J. and Ruxton, G.D., 2002. Living in groups. Oxford University Press.
  7. ↑ Tinbergen, J. (1953). Social behaviour in animals: With special reference to vertebrates. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
  8. 1 2 Wilson, E.O., 2000. Sociobiology. Harvard University Press.
  9. ↑ Michelena, P., Gautrais, J., Gérard, J.F., Bon, R. and Deneubourg, J.L., 2008. Social cohesion in groups of sheep: effect of activity level, sex composition and group size. Applied animal behaviour science, 112(1-2), pp.81-93.
  10. ↑ Pitcher, T.J., Magurran, A.E. and Winfield, I.J., 1982. Fish in larger shoals find food faster. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 10(2), pp.149-151.
  11. ↑ Cvikel, N., Berg, K.E., Levin, E., Hurme, E., Borissov, I., Boonman, A., Amichai, E. and Yovel, Y., 2015. Bats aggregate to improve prey search but might be impaired when their density becomes too high. Current Biology, 25(2), pp.206-211.
  12. ↑ Beekman, M. and Ratnieks, F.L.W., 2000. Long‐range foraging by the honey‐bee, Apis mellifera L. Functional Ecology, 14(4), pp.490-496.
  13. ↑ Von Frisch, K., 1967. The dance language and orientation of bees.
  14. ↑ Plenzich, C.; Despland, E. (2018-04-02). "Host-plant mediated effects on group cohesion and mobility in a nomadic gregarious caterpillar". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 72 (4): 71. doi:10.1007/s00265-018-2482-x
  15. ↑ Treherne, J.E. and Foster, W.A., 1981. Group transmission of predator avoidance behaviour in a marine insect: the Trafalgar effect. Animal Behaviour, 29(3), pp.911-917.
  16. ↑ Siegfried, W.R. and Underhill, L.G., 1975. Flocking as an anti-predator strategy in doves. Animal Behaviour, 23, pp.504-508.
  17. ↑ Hamilton, W.D., 1971. Geometry for the selfish herd. Journal of theoretical Biology, 31(2), pp.295-311.
  18. ↑ Bateman, A.J., 1948. Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity, 2(3), pp.349-368.
  19. ↑ Alexander, R.D., 1974. The evolution of social behavior. Annual review of ecology and systematics, 5(1), pp.325-383.
  20. ↑ Brown, C.R. and Brown, M.B., 1986. Ectoparasitism as a cost of coloniality in cliff swallows (Hirundo pyrrhonota). Ecology, 67(5), pp.1206-1218.
  21. ↑ Hoogland, J.L. and Sherman, P.W., 1976. Advantages and disadvantages of bank swallow (Riparia riparia) coloniality. Ecological Monographs, 46(1), pp.33-58.
  22. 1 2 Silva, J.D., Macdonald, D.W. and Evans, P.G., 1994. Net costs of group living in a solitary forager, the Eurasian badger (Meles meles). Behavioral Ecology, 5(2), pp.151-158.
  23. ↑ Borries, C., Larney, E., Lu, A., Ossi, K. and Koenig, A., 2008. Costs of group size: lower developmental and reproductive rates in larger groups of leaf monkeys. Behavioral Ecology, 19(6), pp.1186-1191.
  24. ↑ Ford, J.R. and Swearer, S.E., 2013. Two's company, three's a crowd: Food and shelter limitation outweigh the benefits of group living in a shoaling fish. Ecology, 94(5), pp.1069-1077.
  25. ↑ Sibly, R.M., 1983. Optimal group size is unstable. Animal behaviour.
  26. ↑ Sterck, E.H., Watts, D.P. and van Schaik, C.P., 1997. The evolution of female social relationships in nonhuman primates. Behavioral ecology and sociobiology, 41(5), pp.291-309.
  27. ↑ Pride, R.E., 2005. Optimal group size and seasonal stress in ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta). Behavioral Ecology, 16(3), pp.550-560.
  28. ↑ Clutton-Brock, T.H., 1989. Female transfer and inbreeding avoidance in social mammals. Nature, 337(6202), p.70.
  29. 1 2 Loehle, C., 1995. Social barriers to pathogen transmission in wild animal populations. Ecology, 76(2), pp.326-335.
  30. ↑ Nabulsi, M.M., Tamim, H., Sabbagh, M., Obeid, M.Y., Yunis, K.A. and Bitar, F.F., 2003. Parental consanguinity and congenital heart malformations in a developing country. American journal of medical genetics Part A, 116(4), pp.342-347.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.