Territoriality IV Outline Fall 09 11_30

Territoriality IV Outline Fall 09 11_30 - Animal Behavior,...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Animal Behavior, IB 144 Territoriality IV November 30, 2009 XI. So who wins in territorial disputes? A. To be territorial, species must have the ability to defend a resource or territory. Hard to imagine a flatworm being territorial. Parker described this as "Resource Holding Potential” (RHP). Sea Anemones are a good example. B. Territory must be worth defending. You must derive a net benefit. If you can make it less worth while for your opponent than it is to you, you increase the chance that the opponent will defer. In other words, increase his cost (risk) compared to expected benefit. 1. Ant territorial wars. Adams Mangrove ants ( Azteca ) 2. Pebble dropping ants. 3. Meiosquilla sweeti (gravel) vs. M. dawsoni (mud). C. Beware of Concorde Fallacy. Short-term, you can’t justify future expenditure on past expenditure. What counts is what it will cost in the future (now until the fitness payoff). Evolutionarily, selection can operate on the total costs and benefits relationship and determine under what conditions animals should fight. D. Resource must be defendable. I.e., grass is, plankton isn’t.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/11/2010 for the course IB Animal Beh taught by Professor Lacey during the Fall '09 term at University of California, Berkeley.

Page1 / 3

Territoriality IV Outline Fall 09 11_30 - Animal Behavior,...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online