Skip to main content
Log in

Communal burrowing in the hystricognath rodent, Octodon degus: a benefit of sociality?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract 

We examined the hypothesis that a main benefit of group-living in the semifossorial rodent, Octodon degus (Rodentia: Octodontidae), is to decrease individual cost of burrow construction. We contrasted the digging behavior of groups of three same-sex, adult-sized individuals with that of solitary degus. The behavior of singles and trios was recorded inside a large terrarium partially filled with natural soil and under controlled conditions of food, light, and temperature. The observation that degus in groups do not decrease their burrowing time or frequency of digging compared with solitary diggers does not support the hypothesis that communal burrowing is a primary cause of degu sociality. On the other hand, the observation that degus in groups removed significantly more soil per capita than solitary digging degus, and that grouped individuals coordinated their digging – group members burrowed mostly in the same sites and formed digging chains –, suggests that social burrowing may potentially reduce the cost of burrow construction in the long term. We suggest that such long-term benefits will be a consequence rather than a cause of degu group-living.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Received: 9 December 1999 / Received in revised form: 2 January 2000 / Accepted: 8 February 2000

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ebensperger, L., Bozinovic, F. Communal burrowing in the hystricognath rodent, Octodon degus: a benefit of sociality?. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 47, 365–369 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650050678

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s002650050678

Navigation