CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Animal Behavior and ReproductionAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesPrimate Behavior and Ecology

Social dominance, aggressiveness and mating success among male house mice (Mus musculus)

Oakeshott, J. G.·1974·Oecologia
DOI 10.1007/bf00345742
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Aspects of male social hierarchies manifest in confined house mice colonies, of population densities comparable with those observed in natural communities, have been studied. Random processes were found to exert significant influences on the social orders established immediately after founding. In addition to the previously reported effect of orders of arrival at the different localities, relative weights were also found to have significant influences on the initial social order.Several changes in the social orders occurred subsequent to the establishment of the initial hierarchies. Aggressiveness and the degree of previous crowding were both found to exert significant effects on the social orders which were finally stabilised. These results are relevant to models recently proposed by Chitty (1960, 1967, 1970) and Christian (1970) for mechanisms of density regulation in rodent populations. In particular, they are consistent with the postulate of Christian (1970) that social dominance ability and density regulation are largely controlled by the adrenopituitary mediated modification of adult behaviour by the juvenile social environment.The relationship between male social status and relative mating success was also investigated. Only a slight positive association was found. Most previous estimates of effective population size have assumed a very pronounced dependence of mating success on social status. The results of the present study thus suggest that the previous estimates have underestimated the effective population size.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00345742

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Similar reproductive advantage of dominance was observed in laboratory mice, but it might be hard to estimate how significant it actually is.

    “Similar reproductive advantage of dominance was observed also in laboratory mice, but in practice it might be hard to estimate how significant it actually is.146”

    From Ecological validity of social interaction tests in rats and mice (2019) · cites this paper as [146]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Oakeshott, J. G.
Affiliations
The University of Adelaide (AU)
Corresponding author
Oakeshott, J. G.
ORCID
Oakeshott, J. G.
Venue
Oecologia
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1974
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
143-158
ISSN
  • 0029-8549 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1939
DOI
10.1007/bf00345742
OpenAlex
W2065805489
Cited by
87
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Oecologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
Keywords
social dominance, aggression, mating success, house mice, Mus musculus, density dependence, effective population size, social status, crowding

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review