Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T13:52:58.368Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Kleptoparasitic Interactions under Asymmetric Resource Valuation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 May 2014

M. Broom
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematical Science, City University London, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB, UK
J. Rychtář*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC 27402, USA
D. Sykes
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC 27402, USA
*
Corresponding author. E-mail: rychtar@uncg.edu
Get access

Abstract

We introduce a game theoretical model of stealing interactions. We model the situation as an extensive form game when one individual may attempt to steal a valuable item from another who may in turn defend it. The population is not homogeneous, but rather each individual has a different Resource Holding Potential (RHP). We assume that RHP not only influences the outcome of the potential aggressive contest (the individual with the larger RHP is more likely to win), but that it also influences how an individual values a particular resource. We investigate several valuation scenarios and study the prevalence of aggressive behaviour. We conclude that the relationship between RHP and resource value is crucial, where some cases lead to fights predominantly between pairs of strong individuals, and some between pairs of weak individuals. Other cases lead to no fights with one individual conceding, and the order of strategy selection is crucial, where the individual which picks its strategy first often has an advantage.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© EDP Sciences, 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

C.J. Barnard. Producers and scroungers: strategies of exploitation and parasitism. Springer, 1984.
Barnard, C.J., Sibly, R.M.. Producers and scroungers: a general model and its application to captive flocks of house sparrows. Anim. Behav., 29 (1981), 543550. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonabeau, E., Theraulaz, G., Deneubourg, J.L.. Dominance orders in animal societies: the self-organization hypothesis revisited. Bull. Math. Biol., 61 (1999), 727757. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, M., Luther, R.M., Ruxton, G.D.. Resistance is useless? – extensions to the game theory of kleptoparasitism. Bull. Math. Biol., 66 (2004), 16451658. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, M., Ruxton, G.D.. Evolutionarily stable kleptoparasitism: consequences of different prey types. Behav. Ecol., 14 (2003), 1, 2333. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broom, M., Rychtář, J.. The evolution of a kleptoparasitic system under adaptive dynamics. J. Math. Biol., 54 (2007), 151177. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Broom, M., Rychtář, J.. Kleptoparasitic melees – modelling food stealing featuring contests with multiple individuals. Bull. Math. Biol., 73 (2011), 683699. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
M. Broom, J. Rychtář. Game-theoretical Models in Biology. vol. 48, CRC Press, 2013.
M. Broom, J. Rychtář, D.G. Sykes. The effect of information on payoff in kleptoparasitic interactions. Topics from the 8th Annual UNCG Regional Mathematics and Statistics Conference, Springer, 2013, pp. 125–134.
Caraco, T., Giraldeau, L.A.. Social foraging: Producing and scrounging in a stochastic environment. J. Theor. Biol., 153 (1991), 559583. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, B.D., Dill, L.M.. Intraspecific kleptoparasitism and counter-tactics in the archerfish (Toxotes chatareus). Behaviour, 149 (2012). 13671394. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delhey, J.K.V., Carrete, M., Martínez, M.. Diet and feeding behaviour of Olrog’s Gull Larus atlanticus in Bahía Blanca, Argentina. Ardea, 89 (2001), 319329. Google Scholar
Dubois, F., Giraldeau, L.A.. Fighting for resources: the economics of defense and appropriation. Ecology, 86 (2005), 311. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubois, F., Giraldeau, L.A., Grant, J.W.A.. Resource defense in a group-foraging context. Behav. Ecol., 14 (2003), 29. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dugatkin, L.A.. Winner and loser effects and the structure of dominance hierarchies. Behav. Ecol. 8 (1997), 583587. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enquist, M., Leimar, O.. Evolution of fighting behaviour: the effect of variation in resource value. J. Theor. Biol., 127 (1987), 187205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M.P. Grimm, M. Klinge. Pike and some aspects of its dependence on vegetation. Craig J.F, editor. Pike: biology and exploitation, Chapman & Hall, 1996, pp. 125–156.
Hamilton, I.M., Dill, L.M.. The use of territorial gardening versus kleptoparasitism by a subtropical reef fish (Kyphosus cornelii) is influenced by territory defendability. Behav. Ecol., 14 (2003), 561568. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
A. Houston, J.M. McNamara. Models of adaptive behaviour: An Approach Based on State. Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1999.
Iyengar, E.V.. Kleptoparasitic interactions throughout the animal kingdom and a re-evaluation, based on participant mobility, of the conditions promoting the evolution of kleptoparasitism. Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 93 (2008), 745762. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeanne, R.L.. Social biology of the neotropical wasp Mischocyttarus drewseni. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., 144 (1972), 63150. Google Scholar
H. Kruuk. The spotted hyena: a study of predation and social behavior. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, 1972.
Mesterton-Gibbons, M., Dugatkin, L.A.. Toward a theory of dominance hierarchies: effects of assessment, group size and variation in fighting ability. Behav. Ecol., 6 (1995), 416423. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, G.A.. Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J. Theor. Biol., 47 (1974), 223243. CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
H.K. Reeve, F.L.W. Ratnieks. Queen-queen conflicts in polygynous societies: mutual tolerance and reproductive skew. Queen number and sociality in insects, Keller, L. (ed.), Oxford Univ. Pr., Oxford, 1993, 45–85.
L.B. Spear, S.N.G. Howell, C.S. Oedekoven, D. Legay, J. Bried. Kleptoparasitism by brown skuas on albatrosses and giant-petrels in the Indian Ocean. The Auk, (1999), 545–548.
W.K. Steele, P.A.R. Hockey. Factors influencing rate and success of intraspecific kleptoparasitism among kelp gulls (Larus dominicanus). The Auk, (1995), 847–859.
Triplet, P., Stillman, R.A., Goss-Custard, J.D.. Prey abundance and the strength of interference in a foraging shorebird. J. Anim. Ecol., 68 (1999), 254265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vehrencamp, S.L.. Optimal degree of skew in cooperative societies. Amer. Zool., 23 (1983), 327335. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
W.L. Vickery, L.A. Giraldeau, J.J. Templeton, D.L. Kramer, C.A. Chapman. Producers, scroungers and group foraging. Amer. Nat., (1991), 847–863.