Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSchnell, Alexandra K.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Carolynn L.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorHanlon, Roger T.  Concept link
dc.contributor.authorHarcourt, Robert  Concept link
dc.date.accessioned2015-09-10T15:21:20Z
dc.date.available2015-09-10T15:21:20Z
dc.date.issued2015-05
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1912/7524
dc.descriptionAuthor Posting. © The Author(s), 2015. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of Elsevier for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Animal Behaviour 107 (2015): 31-40, doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.05.026.en_US
dc.description.abstractGame theory models provide a useful framework for investigating strategies of conflict resolution in animal contests. Model predictions are based on estimates of resource-holding potential (RHP) and vary in their assumptions about how opponents gather information about RHP. Models can be divided into self-assessment strategies (energetic war-of-attrition, E-WOA; cumulative assessment model, CAM) and mutual assessment strategies (sequential assessment model, SAM). We used laboratory-staged contests between male giant Australian cuttlefish, Sepia apama, to evaluate RHP traits and to test game theory models. Mantle length was a key indicator of RHP because it predicted contest outcome, whereby larger individuals were more likely to win a contest. Winners and losers did not match behaviours, ruling out the E-WOA. There was no relationship between contest outcome, duration and escalation rates, arguing against the CAM. Persistence to continue a contest was based on RHP asymmetry, rather than loser and/or winner RHP, providing support for the SAM. Motivation to fight was determined from a male’s latency to resume a contest following the introduction of a female during a contest. The latency to resume a contest was negatively related to the size of the focal male and positively related to the size of their opponent. These results show that competing males are able to gather information concerning RHP asymmetries, providing support for mutual assessment. Furthermore, males showed significant behavioural differences in their responses to relatively larger than to relatively smaller opponents. Using an integrative approach, our study provides a well-substantiated example of mutual assessment.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis research was supported by funding to A.K.S. from Macquarie University.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.05.026
dc.subjectContest competitionen_US
dc.subjectFighting abilityen_US
dc.subjectGame theoryen_US
dc.subjectResource-holding potentialen_US
dc.subjectSequential assessment modelen_US
dc.subjectVisual signallingen_US
dc.titleGiant Australian cuttlefish use mutual assessment to resolve male-male contestsen_US
dc.typePreprinten_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record