What do wild saiga antelopes tell us about the relative roles of the two brain hemispheres in social interactions?
Two brain hemispheres are unequally involved in the processing of social stimuli, as demonstrated in a wide range of vertebrates. A considerable number of studies have shown the right hemisphere advantage for social processing. At the same time, an approach–withdrawal hypothesis, mainly based on experimental evidence, proposes the involvement of both brain hemispheres according to approach and withdrawal motivation. The present study aimed to test the relative roles of the two hemispheres in social responses displayed in a natural context. Visual biases, implicating hemispheric lateralization, were estimated in the social interactions of saiga antelope in the wild. In individually identified males, the left/right visual field use during approach and withdrawal responses was recorded based on the lateral head/body position, relative to the conspecific. Lateralized approach responses were investigated in three types of interactions, with left visual field bias found for chasing a rival, no bias—for attacking a rival, and right visual field bias—for pursuing a female. In two types of withdrawal responses, left visual field bias was found for retreating after fighting, while no bias was evident in fight rejecting. These findings demonstrate that neither the right hemisphere advantage nor the approach–withdrawal distinction can fully explain the patterns of lateralization observed in social behaviour. It is clear that both brain hemispheres play significant roles in social responses, while their relative contribution is likely determined by a complex set of motivational and emotional factors rather than a simple dichotomous distinction such as, for example, approach versus withdrawal motivation.
KeywordsLaterality Hemispheric specialization Brain asymmetry Eye preference Ungulate Contest behaviour
We are grateful to Anna Lushchekina and the staff of Stepnoi State Nature Sanctuary, and especially Vladimir Kalmykov, for valuable support and assistance during data collection.
This work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (Grant No. 14-14-00284).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable international, national, and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the St. Petersburg State University ethical committee (Permit No. 131-03-4).
Informed consent is not applicable to the study since no human subjects were included in the study.
- Forrester GS, Todd BK (2018) A comparative perspective on lateral biases and social behavior. In: Forrester GS, Hopkins WD, Hudry K, Lindell A (eds) Progress in brain research. Cerebral lateralization and cognition: evolutionary and developmental investigations of behavioral biases, vol 238. Elsevier, New York, pp 377–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2018.06.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gilev A, Karenina K (2015) The significance of artesian wells for saigas within the Stepnoi Sanctuary, Astrakhan region. Saiga News 20:15–17Google Scholar
- Herron MA, Martin JE, Joyce JR (1978) Quantitative study of the decussating optic axons in the pony, cow, sheep, and pig. Am J Vet Res 39:1137–1139Google Scholar
- Karenina K, Giljov A (2018) Mother and offspring lateralized social behavior across mammalian species. In: Forrester GS, Hopkins WD, Hudry K, Lindell A (eds) Progress in brain research. Cerebral lateralization and cognition: evolutionary and developmental investigations of behavioral biases, vol 238. Elsevier, New York, pp 115–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.pbr.2018.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kelley NJ, Hortensius R, Schutter DJ, Harmon-Jones E (2017) The relationship of approach/avoidance motivation and asymmetric frontal cortical activity: a review of studies manipulating frontal asymmetry. Int J Psychophysiol 119:19–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Koboroff A, Kaplan G, Rogers LJ (2008) Hemispheric specialization in Australian magpies (Gymnorhina tibicen) shown as eye preferences during response to a predator. Brain Res Bull 76(3):304–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2008.02.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Prete G, Laeng B, Fabri M, Foschi N, Tommasi L (2015) Right hemisphere or valence hypothesis, or both? The processing of hybrid faces in the intact and callosotomized brain. Neuropsychologia 68:94–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sokolov VE, Zhirnov LV (1998) The Saiga: phylogeny, systematics, ecology, conservation and use [filogeniya, sistematika, ekologiya, oxrana i ispol’zovanie]. Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow (in Russian) Google Scholar
- Vallortigara G, Versace E (2017) Laterality at the neural, cognitive, and behavioral levels. In: Call J (ed) APA Handbook of comparative psychology, vol 1. Basic concepts, methods, neural substrate, and behavior. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, pp 557–577Google Scholar
- Vauclair J, Yamazaki Y, Güntürkün O (2006) The study of hemispheric specialization for categorical and coordinate spatial relations in animals. Neuropsychologia 44:1524–1534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.01.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar