Cited by 93Animal Behavior and ReproductionNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorOlfactory and Sensory Function Studies

Urine marking and social dominance in male house mice (Mus musculus domesticus)

Drickamer, Lee C·2001·Behavioural Processes

Abstract

House mice use urine marking for a variety of forms of social communication. Urine marking varies with dominance status; socially dominant male house mice urine mark more than those that are socially subordinate. Experiment I was designed to confirm this previous finding. Experiment II was designed to test whether urine marking, measured prior to testing males for aggression, could be used to predict social dominance. Mice were tested for urine marking in 20 cmx40 cm rectangular cages with filter paper below the wire mesh bottom of the cage. In Experiment I, groups of four males were tested in a round robin design to assess social dominance and were then placed individually in urine marking cages. Social dominance was a significant predictor of the number of 1 cm squares that contained urine marks, both with regard to interior squares and for perimeter squares in the test cage. In Experiment II, groups of four males were first tested individually in urine marking cages and then used for round robin aggressive encounters to assess social dominance. The number of interior squares with urine marks, and, to a lesser extent, the number of perimeter squares with urine marks, were both significant predictors of aggression scores and social dominance status. Being able to judge social dominance without having the mice encounter each other could be a valuable tool for future work; confounding effects on such parameters as hormone levels could be avoided while obtaining an estimate of male social dominance status.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0376-6357(00)00152-2

Cites

42 of 42 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?

  • Social dominance can be reliably found in mice kept in captivity, both laboratory mice and wild ones.

    “Keeping this limitation in mind, social dominance can be reliably found in mice kept in captivity.This is true both for laboratory mice 72,92,96,135,136 and wild ones.80,137”
  • Dominant mice leave more scent marks, which probably repels subordinates.

    “Dominants are known to leave more scent marks, which probably repels subordinates as well.89,137”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Drickamer, L. C.
Affiliations
Northern Arizona University (US)
Corresponding author
Drickamer, Lee C
Venue
Behavioural Processes
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-03
Volume
53
Issue
1-2
Pages
113-120
ISSN
0376-6357 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2071074966
Cited by
93
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioural Processes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
Keywords
urine marking, social dominance, house mice, Mus musculus domesticus, male aggression, social communication

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