CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 116Animal Behavior and ReproductionPrimate Behavior and EcologyEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Stability of Social Status in Wild Rats: Age and the Role of Settled Dominance

Berdoy, Manuel, Smith, Pete, Macdonald, David W.·1995·Behaviour
DOI 10.1163/156853995x00694
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

One way of understanding the evolution of social dominance is to establish which factors determine an animal's ability to dominate conspecifics. The dynamics of dominance between 20 adult male wild rats were investigated in a multi-generational, free-breeding colony in a large outdoor enclosure. Dominance relations between the adult males were stable and organised in a near-linear hierarchy. Dyadic interactions not fitting the social hierarchy, as well as challenges by subordinates and overt aggression by dominants were rare (< 5%) and principally occurred between animals of similar social rank. The correlates of social status within the colony show, for the first time in adult small mammals, that despite the significant role of body weight on the probability of winning contests, age was the most reliable indicator of adult dominance, with the higher ranking males being older but not necessarily heavier. Age also explained the outcome of 85% of agonistic encounters between dyads, compared with 65% for weights. The proximate mechanisms of age-related dominance fit better the 'previous outcome' hypothesis than the alternative 'fighting skill' or 'site dominance' hypotheses. The stability of dominance relations and the role of age, which in stable groups is equivalent with time spent in the colony, suggest that rats remain dominant over individuals that they have beaten in the past, long after initial body weight asymmetries have disappeared. The functional significance of the acceptance of subordinate social status is consistent with the fact that dominant individuals generally could not monopolize food resources or mates.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/156853995x00694

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • Factors that increase the probability of an animal becoming dominant are: longer residence on a given territory than a rival, being older and heavier, history of winning previous fights, and lack of stressful, traumatizing events.

    “Those are: longer residence on a given territory than a rival, being older and heavier, history of winning previous fights and lack of stressful, traumatizing events.25,50,76,92,104”

    From Ecological validity of social interaction tests in rats and mice (2019) · cites this paper as [104]

  • Wild rat social dominance is reflected mainly by fighting for food.

    “This is reflected mainly by fighting for food.”

    From Ecological validity of social interaction tests in rats and mice (2019) · cites this paper as [104]

  • In naturalistic conditions, wild rats display robust social dominance.

    “In naturalistic conditions, wild rats display robust social dominance, which was described in detail by Calhoun.25,104”

    From Ecological validity of social interaction tests in rats and mice (2019) · cites this paper as [104]

  • In stable groups, even though overt aggression is largely reduced, animals can treat each other differently depending on their social position.

    “In stable groups, even though overt aggression is largely reduced, animals can treat each other differently depending on their social position.”

    From Ecological validity of social interaction tests in rats and mice (2019) · cites this paper as [104]

  • Fights for food are most intensive when clear hierarchy is not yet established.

    “Such fights are most intensive when clear hierarchy is not yet established.”

    From Ecological validity of social interaction tests in rats and mice (2019) · cites this paper as [104]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Berdoy, M., Smith, P., & Macdonald, D. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Central Science Laboratory, MAFF, Tangley Place, Worplesdon, Guildford, Surrey GU3 3LQ, England, UK
ORCID
Venue
Behaviour
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Published
1995
Volume
132
Issue
3-4
Pages
193-212
ISSN
  • 0005-7959 (ISSN-L)
  • 1568-539X
DOI
10.1163/156853995x00694
OpenAlex
W2007328016
Cited by
116
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Behaviour (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
social dominance, dominance hierarchy, wild rats, Rattus norvegicus, body weight

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