Advertisement

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 68, Issue 6, pp 915–925 | Cite as

Dynamic social networks in guppies (Poecilia reticulata)

  • Alexander D. M. Wilson
  • Stefan Krause
  • Richard James
  • Darren P. Croft
  • Indar W. Ramnarine
  • Karoline K. Borner
  • Romain J. G. Clement
  • Jens Krause
Original Paper

Abstract

One of the main challenges in the study of social networks in vertebrates is to close the gap between group patterns and dynamics. Usually scan samples or transect data are recorded to provide information about social patterns of animals, but these techniques themselves do not shed much light on the underlying dynamics of such groups. Here we show an approach which captures the fission-fusion dynamics of a fish population in the wild and demonstrates how the gap between pattern and dynamics may be closed. Our analysis revealed that guppies have complex association patterns that are characterised by close strong connections between individuals of similar behavioural type. Intriguingly, the preference for particular social partners is not expressed in the length of associations but in their frequency. Finally, we show that the observed association preferences could have important consequences for transmission processes in animal social networks, thus moving the emphasis of network research from descriptive mechanistic studies to functional and predictive ones.

Keywords

Social network analysis Behaviour type Fission-fusion dynamics 

Notes

Acknowledgments

ADM Wilson acknowledges financial support from research fellowships from the Alexander von Humboldt foundation and IGB. RC was supported by an IGB studentship, KB by a Nafög studentship and DPC by funding from the Leverhulme Trust. We would like to thank Kharan Deonarinesingh for assistance in the field.

Ethical standards

This research was performed in accordance with the laws, guidelines and ethical standards of the country in which they were performed (Trinidad).

Supplementary material

265_2014_1704_MOESM1_ESM.docx (18 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 18 kb)
265_2014_1704_MOESM2_ESM.doc (68 kb)
Fig. S1 Frequency distributions of (a) the lengths of contact with a particular nearest neighbour, (b) the lengths of social contact, and (c) the lengths of being alone in the observed data (grey diamonds) and in a simulation of the very simple model that uses unconditional probabilities p(i) and p(x) of being social and of being alone, respectively (black circles) (DOC 68 kb)

References

  1. Blonder B, Wey TW, Dornhaus A, James R, Sih A (2012) Temporal dynamics and network analysis. Methods Ecol Evol 3:958–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boccaletti S, Latora V, Moreno Y, Chavez M, Hwang DU (2006) Complex networks: structure and dynamics. Phys Rep 424:175–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cane V (1978) On fitting low-order Markov chains to behaviour sequences. Anim Behav 26:332–338Google Scholar
  4. Croft DP, Arrowsmith BJ, Bielby J, Skinner K, White E, Couzin ID, Magurran AE, Ramnarine I, Krause J (2003) Mechanisms underlying shoal composition in the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Oikos 100:429–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Croft DP, Krause J, James R (2004) Social networks in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Proc R Soc Lond B 271:S516–S519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Croft DP, James R, Thomas POR, Hathaway C, Mawdsley D, Laland KN, Krause J (2006) Social structure and co-operative interactions in a wild population of guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 59:644–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Croft DP, James R, Krause J (2008) Exploring animal social networks. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  8. Croft DP, Krause J, Darden SK, Ramnarine IW, Faria JJ, James R (2009) Behavioural trait assortment in a social network: patterns and implications. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1495–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Croft DP, Edenbrow M, Darden SK, Ramnarine IW, Oosterhout C, Cable J (2011a) Effect of gyrodactylid ectoparasites on host behaviour and social network structure in guppies Poecilia reticulata. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:2219–2227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Croft DP, Madden JR, Franks DW, James R (2011b) Hypothesis testing in animal social networks. Trends Ecol Evol 26:502–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cross PC, Creech TG, Ebinger MR, Heisey DM, Irvine KM, Creel S (2012) Wildlife contact analysis: emerging methods, questions, and challenges. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 66:1437–1447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eagle N, Pentland A, Lazer D (2009) Inferring friendship network structure by using mobile phone data. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:15274–15278PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flack JC, Girvan M, de Waal FBM, Krakauer DC (2006) Policing stabilizes construction of social niches in primates. Nature 439:426–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Franks DW, James R, Noble J, Ruxton GD (2009) A foundation for developing a methodology for social network sampling. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1079–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Godfrey SS, Bull C, James R, Murray K (2009) Network structure and parasite transmission in a group living lizard, the gidgee skink, Egernia stokesii. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1045–1056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guttridge TL, Gruber SH, DiBattista JD, Feldheim KA, Croft DP, Krause S, Krause J (2011) Assortative interactions and leadership in a free-ranging population of juvenile lemon shark Negaprion brevirostris. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 423:235–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harcourt JL, Sweetman G, Manica A, Johstone RA (2010) Pairs of fish resolve conflicts over coordinated movement by taking turns. Curr Biol 20:156–160Google Scholar
  18. Henzi SP, Lusseau D, Weingrill T, Schaik CP, Barrett L (2009a) Cyclicity in the structure of female baboon social networks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1015–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Henzi SP, Lusseau D, Weingrill T, van Schaik CP, Barrett L (2009b) Cyclicity in the structure of female baboon social networks. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:1015–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Herbert-Read JE, Krause S, Morrell LJ, Schaerf TM, Krause J, Ward AJW (2013) The role of individuality in collective group movement. Proc R Soc B 280:2012–2564Google Scholar
  21. Kerth GG, Perony NN, Schweitzer FF (2011) Bats are able to maintain long-term social relationships despite the high fission-fusion dynamics of their groups. Proc R Soc Lond B 278:2761–2767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krause J, Ruxton GD (2002) Living in groups. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  23. Krause J, Croft DP, James R (2007) Social network theory in the behavioural sciences: potential applications. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krause J, Lusseau D, James R (2009) Animal social networks: an introduction. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:967–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lea AJ, Blumstein DT, Wey TW, Martin JGA (2010) Heritable victimization and the benefits of agonistic relationships. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 107:21587–21592PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lee PC (1999) Comparative primate socioecology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lusseau D (2003) The emergent properties of a dolphin social network. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:S186–S188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Madden JR, Drewe JA, Pearce GP, Clutton-Brock TH (2009) The social network structure of a wild meerkat population: 2. Intragroup interactions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:81–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Magurran AE (2005) Evolutionary biology: The Trinidadian guppy. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. Manly BFJ (1995) A note on the analysis of species co-occurrences. Ecology 76:1109–1115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marschall N (2007) Methodological pitfalls in social network analysis: Why current methods produce questionable results. VDM, SaarbrückenGoogle Scholar
  32. McDonald DB (2007) Predicting fate from early connectivity in a social network. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104:10910–10914PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Metz HAJ, Dienske H, de Jonge G, Putters FA (1983) Continuous-time Markov chains as models for animal behaviour. Bull Math Biol 45:643–658Google Scholar
  34. Naug D (2008) Structure of the social network and its influence on transmission dynamics in a honeybee colony. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 62:1719–1725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oh KP, Badyaev AV (2010) Structure of social networks in a passerine bird: consequences for sexual selection and the evolution of mating strategies. Am Nat 176:E80–E89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Perreault C (2010) A note on reconstructing animal social networks from independent small-group observations. Anim Behav 80:551–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pike TW, Samanta M, Lindstroem J, Royle NJ (2008) Behavioural phenotype affects social interactions in an animal network. Proc R Soc Lond B 275:2515–2520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pinter-Wollman N, Hobson EA, Smith JE, Edelman AJ, Shizuka D et al (2013) The dynamics of animal social networks: analytical, conceptual, and theoretical advances. Behav Ecol. doi: 10.1093/beheco/art047 Google Scholar
  39. Ramos-Fernandez G, Boyer D, Aureli F, Vick LG (2009) Association networks in spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:999–1013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Riesch R, Plath M, Schlupp I (2011) Toxic hydrogen sulphide and dark caves: pronounced male life-history divergence among locally adapted Poecilia mexicana (Poeciliidae). J Evol Biol 24:596–606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Santos FC, Pacheco JM, Lenaerts T (2006) Evolutionary dynamics of social dilemmas in structured heterogeneous populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:3490–3494PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sendova-Franks AB, Hayward RK, Wulf B, Klimek T, James R et al (2010) Emergency networking: famine relief in ant colonies. Anim Behav 79:473–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sih A, Hanser SF, McHugh KA (2009) Social network theory: new insights and issues for behavioral ecologists. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:975–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Snijders TAB, van de Bunt GG, Steglich CEG (2010) Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Soc Networks 32:44–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sundaresan SR, Fischhoff IR, Dushoff J, Rubenstein DI (2007) Network metrics reveal differences in social organization between two fission-fusion species, Grevy’s zebra and onager. Oecologia 151:140–149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sundaresan, Fischhoff IR, Dushoff J (2009) Avoiding spurious findings of nonrandom social structure in association data. Anim Behav 77:1381–1385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393:440–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wey T, Blumstein DT, Shen W, Jordan F (2008) Social network analysis of animal behaviour: a promising tool for the study of sociality. Anim Behav 75:333–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Williams R, Lusseau D (2006) A killer whale social network is vulnerable to targeted removals. Biol Lett 2:497–500PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wolf JBW, Mawdsley D, Trillmich F, James R (2007) Social structure in a colonial mammal: unravelling hidden structural layers and their foundations by network analysis. Anim Behav 74:1293–1302CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander D. M. Wilson
    • 1
    • 7
  • Stefan Krause
    • 2
  • Richard James
    • 3
  • Darren P. Croft
    • 4
  • Indar W. Ramnarine
    • 5
  • Karoline K. Borner
    • 1
  • Romain J. G. Clement
    • 1
  • Jens Krause
    • 1
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of the Biology and Ecology of FishesLeibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland FisheriesBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceLübeck University of Applied SciencesLübeckGermany
  3. 3.Department of PhysicsUniversity of BathBathUK
  4. 4.Centre for Research in Animal Behaviour, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Washington Singer LabsUniversity of ExeterExeterUK
  5. 5.Department of Life SciencesUniversity of the West IndiesSt AugustineTrinidad and Tobago
  6. 6.Humboldt University, Faculty of Life SciencesBerlinGermany
  7. 7.Department of BiologyCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations