Experimental field evidence that out-group threats influence within-group behavior

Abstract

In social species, conspecific outsiders present various threats to groups and their members. These out-group threats are predicted to affect subsequent within-group interactions (e.g., affiliation and aggression) and individual behavior (e.g., foraging and vigilance decisions). However, experimental investigations of such consequences are rare, especially in natural conditions. We used field-based call playbacks and fecal presentations on habituated wild dwarf mongooses (Helogale parvula)-a cooperatively breeding, territorial species-to examine postinteraction responses to the simulated threat of a rival group. Dwarf mongooses invested more in grooming of groupmates, foraged closer together, and more regularly acted as sentinels (a raised guard) after encountering indicators of rival-group presence compared to control conditions. These behavioral changes likely arise from greater anxiety and, in the case of increased vigilance, the need to seek additional information about the threat. The influence of an out-group threat lasted at least 1 h but individuals of different dominance status and sex responded similarly, potentially because all group members suffer costs if a contest with rivals is lost. Our results provide field-based experimental evidence from wild animals that out-group threats can influence within-group behavior and decision making, and suggest the need for greater consideration of the lasting impacts of social conflict.

Keywords: behavioral consequences; conflict; group living; out-group threat; rival group; within-group behavior.

Figure 1

Immediate (A, B) and subsequent (C, D) responses of dwarf mongooses to control (herbivore) and rival-group playbacks (N = 7 groups). Shown in all panels are the values for each group (connected by solid lines; the data values for some groups are the same, thus the number of lines can appear less than 7) and the overall treatment mean (solid squares) ± SE. NS = nonsignificant. *P < 0.05.

Figure 2

Immediate responses of dwarf mongooses to control (herbivore) and rival-group (A, B) playbacks and (C, D) fecal presentations (N = 7 groups). Shown in all panels are the values for each group (connected by solid lines) and the overall treatment mean (solid squares) ± SE. *P < 0.05.

Figure 3

Foraging (A, B) and sentinel (C, D) responses of dwarf mongooses to control (herbivore) and rival-group playbacks and fecal presentations (N = 7 groups). Shown in all panels are the values for each group (connected by solid lines) and the overall treatment mean (solid squares) ± SE. *P < 0.05.