Kinship, association, and social complexity in bats
Among mammals, bats exhibit extreme variation in sociality, with some species living largely solitary lives while others form colonies of more than a million individuals. Some tropical species form groups during the day that persist throughout the year while many temperate species only gather into groups during hibernation or parturition. How groups form and then persist has now been described for a number of species, but the degree to which kinship explains patterns of association has never been quantified across species. Here, we use social network analysis and genetic data to determine the extent to which relatedness contributes to associations among individuals estimated from free-ranging animals across nine species from four families of bats. Network analysis reveals that all species show evidence of emergent social structure. Variation in the strength of the relationship between genetic relatedness and social association appears to be related to the degree of roost switching, i.e., species in which individuals change roosts frequently tend to exhibit higher levels of association among relatives. Sex-biased dispersal determines whether associations were between male or female relatives. The strength of associations among kin does not predict known occurrence of complex behaviors, such as dominance or various types of cooperation, indicating that kinship is not a prerequisite for social complexity in bats.
The number of differentiated relationships has been proposed as a way to measure social complexity. Among primates, relationships can be differentiated on the basis of rank, age, kinship, or association. Application of this approach to other groups of mammals that vary in sociality could help reveal ecological, behavioral, or cognitive similarities and differences between species. As a first step toward this approach, we used social network analysis on long-term individual records and estimated relatedness using genetic markers for nine species of bats. We confirmed nonrandom emergent social structure in all species. Kinship was predictive of social association among individuals of the same sex in a few species, but largely independent of the occurrence of complex behaviors, such as dominance among males or cooperation among females. Complex social behavior in bats appears to require frequent interactions among a small number of individuals that roost together for multiple years.
KeywordsSocial networks Kinship Modularity Fission-fusion Cooperation
We thank B. Negash for assistance in preparing data and H. Whitehead, D. Lukas, P. Kappeler, and two anonymous reviewers, as well as several other participants of the Göttinger Freilandtage, for useful suggestions.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
- Arnold BD (2011) Social vocalizations and their implications for group dynamics of pallid bats (Antrozous pallidus). Doctoral dissertation, University of MarylandGoogle Scholar
- Aureli F, Schaffner CM, Boesch C et al (2008) Fission-fusion dynamics: new research frameworks. Curr Anthropol 49:627–654Google Scholar
- Bradbury JW (1977) Social organization and communication. In: Wimsatt WA (ed) The biology of bats. Academic Press, New York, pp 1–72Google Scholar
- Farine DR, Sheldon BC (2016) Social ecology of a woodland songbird community: from individual movements to the emergence of population social structure. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/085944
- He P, Maldonado-Chaparro A, Farine DR (2019) The role of habitat configuration in shaping social structure: a gap in studies of animal social complexity. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-018-2602-7
- Kappeler PM (2019) A framework for studying social complexity. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-018-2601-8
- McCracken GF (1987) Genetic structure of bat social groups. In: Racey PA, Fenton MB, Rayner JMV (eds) Recent advances in the study of bats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 281–298Google Scholar
- Moehlman PD, Hofer H (1997) Cooperative breeding, reproductive suppression, and body mass in canids. In: Solomon NG, French JA (eds) Cooperative breeding in mammals. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 76–128Google Scholar
- Parsons JG, SKA R, Shilton LA (2011) Roost fidelity in spectacled flying-foxes Pteropus conspicillatus: implications for conservation and management. In: Law B, Eby P, Lunney D, Lumsden L (eds) The biology and conservation of Australasian bats. Royal Zoological Society of NSW, Mosman, pp 66–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Payne K (2003) Sources of social complexity in the three elephant species. In: de Waal FBM, Tyack PL (eds) Animal social complexity. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 57–85Google Scholar
- Wilkinson GS (1985a) The social organization of the common vampire bat. I. Pattern and cause of association. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 17:111–121Google Scholar
- Wilkinson GS (1985b) The social organization of the common vampire bat. II. Mating system, genetic structure, and relatedness. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 17:123–134Google Scholar
- Wilkinson GS (1987) Altruism and cooperation in bats. In: Racey PA, Fenton MB, Rayner JMV (eds) Recent advances in the study of bats. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 299–323Google Scholar
- Worthington-Wilmer J, Barratt EM (1996) A non-lethal method of tissue sampling for genetic studies of chiropterans. Bat Res News 37:1–3Google Scholar