Self-assessment by males during energetically costly contests over precopula females in amphipods

In animal contests, individuals can either engage in mutual assessment of both their own and their opponent's resource-holding potential (RHP) and adjust their behaviour according to estimated differences, or instead persist in accordance with thresholds determined by assessment of just their own RHP. We examined the predictions of alternative mutual assessment and self-assessment models for decision rules in contest resolution during struggles between males over females in precopula in the amphipod Gammarus pulex. Contest duration was positively related to the weight of the loser but not the weight of the winner. Our results support the hypothesis that males rely on information about their own RHP in determining contest behaviour and do not use information about their opponent. Fighting was energetically costly, and energy reserves were depleted during contests. Contest duration was associated with the physiological state of the loser (but not the winner) at the end of the contest, and to a lesser extent his size, further supporting self-assessment. (c) 2006 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Do mirrors reflect reality in agonistic encounters? A test of mutual cooperation in displays

Animals frequently engage in mutual displays that may allow or at least help decisions about the outcome of agonistic encounters with mutual benefit to the opponents. In fish these often involve lateral displays, with previous studies finding evidence of population-level lateralization with a marked preference for showing the right side and using the right eye. Because both opponents tend to show this preference a head to tail configuration is formed and is used extensively during the display phase. Here we tested the significance of these lateral displays by comparing displays to a mirror with those to a real opponent behind a transparent barrier. The frequency of displays was lower to a mirror but the individual displays were of greater duration indicating a slower pace of the interaction with a mirror. This suggests that fish respond to initiatives of real opponents but as mirror images do not initiate moves the focal fish only moves when it is ready to change position. However, lateralization was still found with mirrors, indicating that the right-side bias is a feature of the individual and not of the interaction between opponents. We discuss implications for ideas about the evolution of mutual cooperation and information exchange in contests, as well as the utility of the use of mirrors in the study of aggression in fish.

Aggressiveness as a component of fighting ability in pigs using a game-theoretical framework

Understanding animal contests has benefited greatly from employing the concept of fighting ability, termed resource-holding potential (RHP), with body size/weight typically used as a proxy. However, victory does not always go to the larger/heavier contestant and the existing RHP approach thereby fails to accurately predict contest outcome. Aggressiveness, typically studied as a personality trait, might explain part of this discrepancy. We investigated whether aggressiveness forms a component of RHP, examining effects on contest outcome, duration and phases, plus physiological measures of costs (lactate and glucose). Furthermore, using the correct theoretical framework, we provide the first study to investigate whether individuals gather and use information on aggressiveness as part of an assessment strategy. Pigs, Sus scrofa, were assessed for aggressiveness in resident-intruder tests whereby attack latency reflects aggressiveness. Contests were then staged between size-matched animals diverging in aggressiveness. Individuals with a short attack latency in the resident-intruder test almost always initiated the first bite and fight in the subsequent contest. However, aggressiveness had no direct effect on contest outcome, whereas bite initiation did lead to winning in contests without an escalated fight. This indirect effect suggests that aggressiveness is not a component of RHP, but rather reflects a signal of intent. Winner and loser aggressiveness did not affect contest duration or its separate phases, suggesting aggressiveness is not part of an assessment strategy. A greater asymmetry in aggressiveness prolonged contest duration and the duration of displaying, which is in a direction contrary to assessment models based on morphological traits. Blood lactate and glucose increased with contest duration and peaked during escalated fights, highlighting the utility of physiological measures as proxies for fight cost. Integrating personality traits into the study of contest behaviour, as illustrated here, will enhance our understanding of the subtleties of agonistic interactions.

To breathe or fight? Siamese fighting fish differ when facing a real opponent or mirror image.

Displays are a feature of animal contest behaviour and have been interpreted as a means of gathering information on opponent fighting ability, as well as signalling aggressive motivation. In fish, contest displays often include frontal and lateral elements, which in the latter involves contestants showing their flanks to an opponent. Previous work in a range of fish species has demonstrated population-level lateralization of these displays, preferentially showing one side to their opponent. Mirrors are commonly used in place of a real opponent to study aggression in fish, yet they may disrupt the normal pattern of display behaviour. Here, using Siamese fighting fish, Betta splendens, we compare the aggressive behaviour of males to a mirror image and real opponent behind a transparent barrier. As this species is a facultative air-breather, we also quantify surface breathing, providing insights into underlying fight motivation. Consistent with previous work, we found evidence of population-level
lateralization, with a bias to present the left side and use the left eye when facing a real opponent. Contrary to expectations, there were no differences in the aggressive displays to a mirror and real opponent, with positive correlations between the behaviour in the two scenarios. However, there were important differences in surface breathing, which was more frequent and of longer duration in the mirror treatment. The reasons for these differences are discussed in relation to the repertoire of contest behaviour and motivation when facing a real opponent.

Complex contests and the influence of aggressiveness in pigs

Animal contests vary greatly in behavioural tactics used and intensity reached, with some encounters resolved without physical contact while others escalate to damaging fighting. However, the reasons for such variation remains to be fully explained. Aggressiveness, in terms of a personality trait, offers a potentially important source of variation that has typically been overlooked. Therefore, we studied how aggressiveness as a personality trait influenced escalation between contestants matched for resource holding potential (RHP), using detailed observations of the contest behaviour, contest dynamics, and escalation levels. We predicted that winner and loser behaviour would differ depending on personality. This was tested by examining 52 dyadic contests between pigs (Sus scrofa). Aggressiveness was assayed in resident-intruder tests prior to the contest. Contests were then staged between pigs matched for RHP in terms of body weight but differing in their aggressiveness. In 27% of the contests a winner emerged without escalated physical fighting, demonstrating that a fight is not a prerequisite between RHP-matched contestants. However, the duration of contests with or without fighting was the same. In contests without a fight, opponents spent more time on mutual investigation and non-contact displays such as parallel walking, which suggests that ritualized display may facilitate assessment and decision making. Winners low in aggressiveness invested more time in opponent investigation and display and showed substantially less aggression towards the loser after its retreat compared to aggressive winners. Aggressiveness influenced contest dynamics but did not predict the level of escalation. Prominent behavioural differences were found for the interaction between personality and outcome and we therefore recommend including this interaction in models where personality is considered. Analyses based on contest duration only would miss many of the subtleties which are shown here and we therefore encourage more detailed analyses of animal contests, irrespective of the level of contest escalation.

To breathe or fight? Siamese fighting fish differ when facing a real opponent or mirror image

Displays are a feature of animal contest behaviour and have been interpreted as a means of gathering information on opponent fighting ability, as well as signalling aggressive motivation. In fish, contest displays often include frontal and lateral elements, which in the latter involves contestants showing their flanks to an opponent. Previous work in a range of fish species has demonstrated population-level lateralization of these displays, preferentially showing one side to their opponent. Mirrors are commonly used in place of a real opponent to study aggression in fish, yet they may disrupt the normal pattern of display behaviour. Here, using Siamese fighting fish, Betta splendens, we compare the aggressive behaviour of males to a mirror image and real opponent behind a transparent barrier. As this species is a facultative air-breather, we also quantify surface breathing, providing insights into underlying fight motivation. Consistent with previous work, we found evidence of population-level lateralization, with a bias to present the left side and use the left eye when facing a real opponent. Contrary to expectations, there were no differences in the aggressive displays to a mirror and real opponent, with positive correlations between the behaviour in the two scenarios. However, there were important differences in surface breathing, which was more frequent and of longer duration in the mirror treatment. The reasons for these differences are discussed in relation to the repertoire of contest behaviour and motivation when facing a real opponent.

Integrating personality research and animal contest theory:Aggressiveness in the green swordtail xiphophorus helleri

Aggression occurs when individuals compete over limiting resources. While theoretical studies have long placed a strong emphasis on context-specificity of aggression, there is increasing recognition that consistent behavioural differences exist among individuals, and that aggressiveness may be an important component of individual personality. Though empirical studies tend to focus on one aspect or the other, we suggest there is merit in modelling both within- and among-individual variation in agonistic behaviour simultaneously. Here, we demonstrate how this can be achieved using multivariate linear mixed effect models. Using data from repeated mirror trials and dyadic interactions of male green swordtails, Xiphophorus helleri, we show repeatable components of (co)variation in a suite of agonistic behaviour that is broadly consistent with a major axis of variation in aggressiveness. We also show that observed focal behaviour is dependent on opponent effects, which can themselves be repeatable but were more generally found to be context specific. In particular, our models show that within-individual variation in agonistic behaviour is explained, at least in part, by the relative size of a live opponent as predicted by contest theory. Finally, we suggest several additional applications of the multivariate models demonstrated here. These include testing the recently queried functional equivalence of alternative experimental approaches, (e.g., mirror trials, dyadic interaction tests) for assaying individual aggressiveness. © 2011 Wilson et al.