Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 67, Issue 6, pp 895–904 | Cite as

The smell of desperadoes? Beavers distinguish between dominant and subordinate intruders

  • Helga Veronica Tinnesand
  • Susan Jojola
  • Andreas Zedrosser
  • Frank RosellEmail author
Original Paper


Olfactory signals can contain information, such as age and social status, and play a vital role in competitor assessment. In many territorial species, subordinates must leave their natal colony to obtain their own territory and mate. These individuals could be aggressive opponents in agonistic encounters, as they will have little to lose (the desperado effect). In this study, we tested the hypothesis that dominance and age are coded in the anal gland secretion (AGS) of the monogamous and highly territorial Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber), and if this information is used by conspecifics to evaluate the potential threat posed by an intruder. Territorial intrusions were simulated by presenting residents with a two-way choice test of AGS from an unknown male territory owner (i.e., dominant) and his son (i.e., subordinate; either 1 or ≥2 years old). Residents spent more time investigating AGS from subordinates than their fathers and responded more aggressively to subordinates than their fathers when subordinates were ≥2 years old. Chemical analyses gas chromatography and multivariate data analysis supported our behavioral findings and revealed differences between chemical profiles of territory owners and subordinates, as well as between the subordinates in different age classes. This study reveals that information about age and social status is coded in AGS of beavers and that this information is used to determine the level of an eventual future response to the signaler.


Anal gland secretion Castor fiber Chemical communication Competitor assessment Desperado effect Dominant–subordinate discrimination 



We would like to thank Howard Parker, Jon Swenson, and Dan Blumstein for useful comments on a previous version of the manuscript; Bjorn Steen for help with the GC-MS analysis; Frode Bergan for technical assistance; and Moritz Klein, Christian Robstad, and Patricia Graf for beaver trapping. Finally, we are sincerely grateful to Dr. Kathreen Ruckstuhl and two anonymous referees who provided critical comments on the drafts of our paper and improved its quality. This work was funded by Telemark University College.

Ethical standards

All trapping and handling procedures were approved by the Norwegian Experimental Animal Board and the Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management and met the guidelines approved by the American Society of Mammalogists (Gannon and Sikes 2007).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Anderson MJ (2001) A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Aust Ecol 26:32–46Google Scholar
  2. Anderson MJ, Willis TJ (2003) Canonical analysis of principal coordinates: a useful method of constrained ordination for ecology. Ecology 84:511–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson MJ, Gorley RN, Clarke KR (2008) PERMANOVA + for PRIMER: guide to software and statistical methods. PRIMER-E, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  4. Archer J (1987) The behavioural biology of aggression. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Bales KL, French JA, McWilliams J, Lake RA, Dietz JM (2006) Effects of social status, age, and season on androgen and cortisol levels in wild male golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia). Horm Behav 49:88–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnard CJ, Brown CAJ (1984) A payoff asymmetry in resident–resident disputes between shrews. Anim Behav 32:302–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bates DM (2010) lme4: mixed-effects modeling with R. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Bergmann M, Olofsson M, Wiklund C (2010) Contest outcome in a territorial butterfly: the role of motivation. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:3027–3033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SJ (1998) The principles of animal communication. Sinauer Associates, Inc., SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  10. Buech RR (1995) Sex difference in behaviour of beavers living in near-boreal lake habitat. Can J Zool 73:2133–2143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buesching CD, Waterhouse JS, Macdonald DW (2002) Gas-chromatographic analyses of the subcaudal gland secretion of the European badger (Meles meles). Part I: chemical differences related to individual parameters. J Chem Ecol 28:41–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Burgener N, Dehnhard M, Hofer H, East ML (2009) Does anal gland scent signal identity in the spotted hyaena? Anim Behav 77:707–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Callander S, Bolton J, Jennions MD, Backwell PRY (2012) A farewell to arms: males with regenerated claws fight harder over resources. Anim Behav 84:619–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell RD (2010) Demography and life history of the Eurasian beaver Castor fiber. Ph.D. thesis, Merton College, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  15. Campbell RD, Rosell F, Nolet BA, Dijkstra VAA (2005) Territory and group size in Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber): echoes of settlement and reproduction? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 58:597–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Campbell RD, Nouvellet P, Newman C, Macdonald DW, Rosell F (2012) The influence of mean climate trends and climate variance on beaver survival and recruitment dynamics. Glob Chang Biol 18:2730–2742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Campbell-Palmer R, Rosell F (2010) Conservation of the Eurasian beaver Castor fiber: an olfactory perspective. Mamm Rev 4:293–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cant MA, Otali E, Mwanguhya F (2001) Eviction and dispersal in co-operatively breeding banded mongooses (Mungo mungo). J Zool 254:155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Caspers BA, Schroeder FC, Franke S, Voigt CC (2011) Scents of adolescence: the maturation of the olfactory phenotype in a free-ranging mammal. PLoS One 6:e21162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Clarke KR, Gorley RN (2006) PRIMER v6: user manual/tutorial. PRIMER-E Ltd, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  21. Clarke KR, Warvick RM (2001) Change in marine communities, 2nd edn. PRIMER-E Ltd, PlymouthGoogle Scholar
  22. Crawley MJ (2007) The R book. John Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Creel S (2001) Social dominance and stress hormones. Trends Ecol Evol 16:491–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. delBarco-Trillo J, McPhee ME, Johnston RE (2011) Syrian hamster males below an age threshold do not elicit aggression from unfamiliar adult males. Aggress Behav 37:91–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. DeStefano S, Koenen KKG, Henner CM, Strules J (2006) Transition to independence by subadult beavers (Castor fiber) in an unexploited, exponentially growing population. J Zool 269:434–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Drickamer LC (1992) Estrous female house mice discriminate dominant from subordinate males and sons of dominant from sons of subordinate males by odor cues. Anim Behav 43:868–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ebling FJ (1977) Hormonal control of mammalian skin glands. In: Mozell MM (ed) Chemical signals in vertebrates. Plenum Press, New York, pp 17–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Eshel I, Sansone E (2001) Multiple asymmetry and concord resolutions of a conflict. J Theor Biol 213:209–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gannon WL, Sikes RS (2007) Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild animals in research. J Mammal 88:809–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gherardi F (2006) Fighting behavior in hermit crabs: the combined effect of resource-holding potential and resource value in Pagurus longicarpus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:500–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gosling LM, Roberts SC (2001) Scent-marking by male mammals: cheat-proof signals to competitors and mates. Adv Stud Behav 30:169–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gower JC (1966) Some distance properties of latent root and vector methods used in multivariate analyses. Biometrika 53:325–338Google Scholar
  33. Grafen A (1987) The logic of divisively asymmetric contests: respect for ownership and the desperado effect. Anim Behav 35:462–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Grønneberg TØ, Lie T (1984) Lipids of the anal gland secretion of beaver, Castor fiber. Chem Scr 24:100–103Google Scholar
  35. Haley MP (1994) Resource-holding power asymmetries, the prior residence effect, and reproductive payoffs in male Northern elephant seal fights. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 34:427–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hartman G (1997) Notes on age at dispersal of beaver (Castor fiber) in an expanding population. Can J Zool 75:959–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hayes RA, Richardson BJ, Wyllie SG (2001) Increased social dominance in rabbits, Oryctalus cuniculus, is associated with increased secretion of 2-phenoxyethanol from the chin gland. In: Marchlewska-Koi A, Lepri JJ, Müller-Schwarze D (eds) Chemical signals in vertebrates 9. Plenum Press, New York, pp 335–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Herr J, Rosell F (2004) Use of space and movement patterns in monogamous adult Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber). J Zool 262:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Herr J, Müller-Schwarze D, Rosell F (2006) Resident beavers (Castor canadensis) do not discriminate between castoreum scent marks from simulated adult and subadult intruders. Can J Zool 84:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Holekamp KE, Smale L (1998) Dispersal status influences hormones and behaviour in the male spotted hyena. Horm Behav 33:205–216PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jenssen TA, Decourcy KR, Congdon JD (2005) Assessment in contests of male lizards (Anolis carolinensis): how should smaller males respond when size matters? Anim Behav 69:1325–1336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Just W, Morris MR (2003) The Napoleon Complex: why smaller males pick fights. Evol Ecol 17:509–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kean EF, Müller CT, Chadwick EA (2011) Otter scent signals age, sex, and reproductive status. Chem Sens 36:555–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kemp DJ, Wiklund C (2004) Fighting without weaponry: a review of male-male contest competition in butterflies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 49:429–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kruczek M (1997) Male rank and female choice in the bank vole, Clethrionomys glareolus. Behav Process 40:171–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. MacDonald EA, Fernandez-Duque E, Evans S, Hagey LR (2008) Sex, age and family differences in the chemical composition of owl monkey (Aotus nancymaae) subcaudal scent secretions. Am J Primatol 70:12–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Maher CR, Lott DF (1995) Definitions of territoriality used in the study of variation in vertebrate spacing systems. Anim Behav 49:1581–1597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Martín J, Moreira PL, López P (2007) Status-signalling chemical badges in male Iberian rock lizards. Funct Ecol 21:568–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. McArdle BH, Anderson MJ (2001) Fitting multivariate models to community data: a comment on distance-based redundancy analysis. Ecology 82:290–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Moretz JA (2003) Aggression and RHP in the northern swordtail fish, Xiphophorus cortezi: the relationship between size and contest dynamics in male–male competition. Ethology 109:995–1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Morrell LJ, Lindström J, Ruxton GD (2005) Why are small males aggressive? Proc R Soc Lond B 272:1235–1241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Müller CA, Manser MB (2007) 'Nasty neighbours' rather than 'dear enemies' in a social carnivore. Proc R Soc Lond B 274:959–965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Müller-Schwarze D (2006) Chemical ecology of vertebrates. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nolet BA, Rosell F (1994) Territoriality and time budgets in beavers during sequential settlement. Can J Zool 72:1227–1237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nolet BA, Broekhuizen S, Dorrestein GM, Rienks KM (1997) Infectious diseases as main causes of mortality to beavers Castor fiber after translocation to the Netherlands. J Zool 241:35–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Olstad O (1937) Beverens (Castor fiber) utbredelse i Norge. Statens viltundersøkelser. Nytt Magasin for Naturvidenskapene 77:217–273Google Scholar
  57. Parker GA (1974) Assessment strategy and evolution of fighting behaviour. J Theor Biol 47:223–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Parker GA (1984) Evolutionary stable strategies. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford, pp 30–61Google Scholar
  59. Parker H, Rosell F (2003) Beaver management in Norway: a model for continental Europe? Lutra 46:223–234Google Scholar
  60. Peterson AM, Sun L, Rosell F (2005) Species and sub-species recognition in the North American beaver. In: Mason RT, McMaster L, Müller-Schwarze D (eds) Chemical signals in vertebrates 10. Plenum Press, New York, pp 56–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Piechocki R (1977) Ökologische todesursachenforschung am Elbebiber (Castor fiber albicus). Beitr Jagd Wildforsch 10:332–341Google Scholar
  62. Ralls K (1971) Mammalian scent marking. Science 171:443–449PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Raynaud J, Dobson SF (2011) Scent communication by female Columbian ground squirrels, Urocitellus columbianus. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rosell F (2002) The function of scent marking in beaver (Castor fiber) territorial defence. Ph.D. thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  65. Rosell F, Bergan F (1998) Free-ranging Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber) deposit anal gland secretion when scent marking. Can Field Nat 112:532–535Google Scholar
  66. Rosell F, Bjørkøyli T (2002) A test of the dear enemy phenomenon in the Eurasian beaver. Anim Behav 63:1073–1078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rosell F, Hovde B (2001) Methods of aquatic and terrestrial netting to capture Eurasian beavers. Wildl Soc Bull 29:269–274Google Scholar
  68. Rosell F, Steifetten Ø (2004) Subspecies discrimination in the Scandinavian beaver (Castor fiber): combining behavioural and chemical evidence. Can J Zool 82:902–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rosell F, Sun L (1999) Use of anal gland secretion to distinguish the two beaver species Castor canadensis and C. fiber. Wildl Biol 5:119–123Google Scholar
  70. Rosell F, Sundsdal LJ (2001) Odorant source used in Eurasian beaver territory marking. J Chem Ecol 27:2471–2491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rosell F, Bergan F, Parker H (1998) Scent-marking in the Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber) as a means of territory defense. J Chem Ecol 24:207–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rosell F, Johansen G, Parker H (2000) Eurasian beavers (Castor fiber) behavioral response to simulated territorial intruders. Can J Zool 78:931–935Google Scholar
  73. Rosell F, Zedrosser A, Parker H (2010) Correlates of body measurements and age in Eurasian beaver from Norway. Eur J Wildl Res 56:43–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rozenfeld FM, Rasmont R (1991) Odour cue recognition by dominant male bank voles, Clethrionomys glareolus. Anim Behav 41:839–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Schulte BA (1993) Chemical composition and ecology of the North American beaver (Castor canadensis). Ph.D. thesis. State University of New York, SyracuseGoogle Scholar
  76. Schulte BA, Müller-Schwarze D, Tang R, Webster FX (1995) Bioactivity of beaver castoreum constituents using principle component analysis. J Chem Ecol 21:941–957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Scordato ES, Drea CM (2007) Scents and sensibility: information content of olfactory signals in the ringtailed lemur, Lemur catta. Anim Behav 73:301–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Smith JLD (1993) The role of dispersal in the Chitwan tiger population. Behaviour 124:3–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Smith IP, Huntingford FA, Atkinson RJA, Taylor AC (1994) Strategic decisions during agnostic behaviour in the velvet swimming crab, Necora puber (L.). Anim Behav 47:885–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sun L (1996) Chemical kin recognition in the beaver (Castor Canadensis): behavior, relatedness and information coding. Ph.D. thesis. State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  81. Sun L, Müller-Schwarze D (1997) Sibling recognition in the beaver: a field test for phenotype matching. Anim Behav 54:493–502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Sun L, Müller-Schwarze D (1998) Anal gland secretion codes for relatedness in the beaver, Castor canadensis. Ethology 104:917–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Sun L, Müller-Schwarze D, Schulte BA (2000) Dispersal pattern and effective population size of the beaver. Can J Zool 78:393–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Svendsen GE (1980) Patterns of scent-mounding in a population of beaver (Castor canadensis). J Chem Ecol 6:133–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Svendsen GE (1989) Pair formation, duration of pair-bonds, and mate replacements in a population of beavers (Castor canadensis). Can J Zool 67:336–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Svensson PA, Lehtonen TK, Wong BBM (2012) A high aggression strategy for smaller males. PLoS One 7:e43121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Taylor PW, Hasson O, Clark DL (2001) Initiation and resolution of jumping spider contests: roles for size, proximity, and early detection of rivals. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 50:403–413Google Scholar
  88. Temeles EJ (1994) The role of neighbors in territorial systems—when are they dear enemies? Anim Behav 47:339–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. White MM, Swaisgood RR, Zhang H (2003) Chemical communication in the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca): the role of age in the signaller and assessor. J Zool 259:171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Wilsson L (1971) Observations and experiments on the ethology of the European beaver (Castor fiber). Viltrevy 8:115–266Google Scholar
  91. Wyatt TD (2003) Pheromones and animal behaviour: communication by smell and taste. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Young AJ, Monfort SL (2009) Stress and the cause of extra-territorial movement in a social carnivore. Biol Lett 5:439–441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Helga Veronica Tinnesand
    • 1
  • Susan Jojola
    • 1
    • 2
  • Andreas Zedrosser
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Frank Rosell
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of Environmental and Health StudiesTelemark University CollegeNorway
  2. 2.Department of Ecology and Natural Resource ManagementNorwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway
  3. 3.Department of Integrative Biology, Institute of Wildlife Biology and Game ManagementUniversity of Natural Resources and Applied Life SciencesViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations