Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does the Jarman–Bell principle at intra-specific level explain sexual segregation in polygynous ungulates? Sex differences in forage digestibility in Soay sheep

  • Physiological Ecology - Original Paper
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Jarman–Bell principle states that large-bodied mammalian herbivores can subsist on lower quality diets because of their lower metabolism requirement/gut capacity ratio. Two major hypotheses for sexual segregation (the behaviour in which animals of the same species aggregate by sex) base their foundations on extending this principle to the intraspecific level, despite the lack of experimental evidence to support this. The first proposes that the larger males can process fibre (low-quality diet) more efficiently than the smaller females, leading to sexual segregation by habitat partitioning due to selection of different food quality and/or quantity (sexual dimorphism–body size hypothesis). The second suggests that the longer time and extra rumination required to digest low-quality food will cause asynchrony of behaviour between males and females, which then leads to sexual segregation (activity budget hypothesis). To provide experimental evidence for the Jarman–Bell principle at the intraspecific level we carried out a set of digestibility trials in Soay sheep (Ovis aries) using grass hay as the diet to test whether sexual dimorphism in body mass can produce significant sexual differences in the efficiency of food digestion. Males were slightly more efficient in digesting forage than females that were at least 30% smaller than the males. Overall, there was a decrease in faecal output of 1 g/kg body mass in favour of males. These differences were not due to differences in food selection, passage rates or faecal particle size and it was not clear why males were more efficient in digesting forage. Although these results do not directly support arguments for either the sexual dimorphism–body size or activity budget hypotheses, they do indicate that the physiological argument upon which the Jarman–Bell principle is founded also operates at the intraspecific level and may be an important factor influencing sexual segregation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barboza PS, Bowyer RT (2000) Sexual segregation in dimorphic deer: a new gastrocentric hypothesis. J Mammal 81:473–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beier P (1987) Sex-differences in quality of white-tailed deer diets. J Mammal 68:323–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell RHV (1970) The use of the herb layer by grazing ungulates in the Serengeti. In: Watson A (ed) Animal populations in relation to their food resources. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 111–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell RHV (1971) A grazing ecosystem in the Serengeti. Sci Am 224:86–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleich VC, Bowyer RT, Wehausen JD (1997) Sexual segregation in mountain sheep: resources or predation? Wildl Monogr 134:1–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonenfant C, Loe LE, Mysterud A, Langvatn R, Stenseth NC, Gaillard JM, Klein F (2004) Multiple causes of sexual segregation in European red deer: enlightenments from varying breeding phenology at high and low latitude. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 271:883–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer RT (2004) Sexual segregation in ruminants: definitions, hypotheses, and implications for conservation and management. J Mammal 85:1039–1052

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer RT, Kie JG (2004) Effects of foraging activity on sexual segregation in mule deer. J Mammal 85:498–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer RT, Kie JG, Vanballenberghe V (1996) Sexual segregation in black-tailed deer—effects of scale. J Wildl Manage 60:10–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer RT, Stewart KM, Wolfe SA, Blundell GM, Lehmkuhl KL, Joy PJ, McDonough TJ, Kie JG (2002) Assessing sexual segregation in deer. J Wildl Manage 66:536–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciuti S, Davini S, Luccarini S, Apollonio M (2004) Could the predation risk hypothesis explain large-scale spatial sexual segregation in fallow deer (Dama dama)? Behav Ecol Sociobiol 56:552–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH, Harvey PH (1983) The functional significance of variation in body size among mammals. Spec Publ Am Soc Mammal 7:633–663

    Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock TH, Guinness FE, Albon SD (1982) Red deer: behaviour and ecology of two sexes. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Conradt L (1998) Could asynchrony in activity between the sexes cause intersexual social segregation in ruminants? Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 265:1359–1363

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Conradt L (2005) Definitions, hypotheses, models and measures in the study of animal segregation. In: Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (eds) Sexual segregation in vertebrates: ecology of the two sexes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 11–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Conradt L, Roper TJ (2000) Activity synchrony and social cohesion: a fission–fusion model. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 267:2213–2218

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cransac N, Gerard JF, Maublanc ML, Pepin D (1998) An example of segregation between age and sex classes only weakly related to habitat use in mouflon sheep (Ovis gmelini). J Zool 244:371–378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C (1859) Origin of species by means of natural selection; or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. Murray, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Demment MW (1982) The scaling of ruminoreticulum size with body weight in East African ungulates. Afr J Ecol 20:43–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demment MW (1983) Feeding ecology and the evolution of body size of baboons. Afr J Ecol 21:219–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demment MW, van Soest PJ (1985) A nutritional explanation for body size patterns of ruminant and nonruminant herbivores. Am Nat 125:641–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhanoa MS, Siddons RC, France J, Gale DL (1985) A multicompartmental model to describe marker excretion patterns in ruminant feces. Br J Nutr 53:663–671

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Equinews (2006) Decyphering hay quality. Equinews 9:10–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Geist V (1974) On the relationship of social evolution and ecology in ungulates. Am Zool 14:205–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginnett TF, Demment MW (1999) Sexual segregation by masai giraffes at two spatial scales. Afr J Ecol 37:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross JE (1998) Sexual segregation in ungulates: a comment. J Mammal 79:1404–1409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross JE, Alkon PU, Demment MW (1995) Grouping patterns and spatial segregation by nubian ibex. J Arid Environ 30:423–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross JE, Alkon PU, Demment MW (1996) Nutritional ecology of dimorphic herbivores: digestion and passage rates in Nubian ibex. Oecologia 107:170–178

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley TA, Hanley KA (1982) Food resource partitioning by sympatric ungulates on Great-Basin rangeland. J Range Manage 35:152–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarman PJ (1974) The social organisation of antelope in relation to their ecology. Behaviour 48:215–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenks JA, Leslie DM, Lochmiller RL, Melchiors MA (1994) Variation in gastrointestinal characteristics of male and female white-tailed deer—implications for resource partitioning. J Mammal 75:1045–1053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanyon JM, Sanson GD (1986) Koala (Phascolarctos cinereus) dentition and nutrition. 2. Implications of tooth wear in nutrition. J Zool 209:169–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawless JF, Cowder M (2004) Covariates and random effects in a gamma process model with application to degradation and failure. Lifetime Data Anal 10:213–227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leaver JD (1982) Herbage intake handbook. British Grassland Society, Hurley

    Google Scholar 

  • MAFF (1975) Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London

  • Main MB (1998) Sexual segregation in ungulates: a reply. J Mammal 79:1410–1415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Main MB, Coblentz BE (1996) Sexual segregation in rocky-mountain mule deer. J Wildl Manage 60:497–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Main MB, Weckerly FW, Bleich VC (1996) Sexual segregation in ungulates—new directions for research. J Mammal 77:449–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matlab (2006) The language of technical computing. The Math Works

  • Mayes RW, Dove H (2006) Manual of methods accompanying: wild and domestic herbivore diet characterization. Satellite Meeting: Wild and Domestic Herbivore Diet Characterization to the VIth International Symposium on the Nutrition of Herbivores. Merida, Mexico, October 2003. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham

  • Michelena P, Bouquet PM, Dissac A, Fourcassie V, Lauga J, Gerard J-F, Bon R (2004) An experimental test of hypotheses explaining social segregation in dimorphic ungulates. Anim Behav 68:1371–1380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michelena P, Noel S, Gautrais J, Gerard JF, Deneubourg JL, Bon R (2006) Sexual dimorphism, activity budget and synchrony in groups of sheep. Oecologia 148:170–180

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mooring MS, Rominger EM (2004) Is the activity budget hypothesis the holy grail of sexual segregation? Behaviour 141:521–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooring MS, Fitzpatrick TA, Benjamin JE, Fraser IC, Nishihira TT, Reisig DD, Rominger EM (2003) Sexual segregation in desert bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis mexicana). Behaviour 140:183–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy MR, Nicoletti JM (1984) Potential reduction of forage and rumen digesta particle-size by microbial action. J Dairy Sci 67:1221–1226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuhaus P, Ruckstuhl KE (2004) Can the activity budget hypothesis explain sexual segregation in desert bighorn sheep? Behaviour 141:513–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owen-Smith RN (1988) Megaherbivores. University Press Cambridge, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parra R (1978) Comparison of foregut and hindgut ferementation in herbivores. In: Montgomery GG (ed) The ecology of arboreal folivores. Smithsonian institution, Washington, pp 205–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ (1998a) Factors affecting food comminution during chewing in ruminants: a review. Biol J Linn Soc 63:233–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ (1998b) The influence of molar occlusal surface area on the voluntary intake, digestion, chewing behaviour and diet selection of red deer (Cervus elaphus). J Zool 245:307–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ (1998c) The influence of sexual dimorphism in body size and mouth morphology on diet selection and sexual segregation in cervids. Acta Vet Hung 46:357–367

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ (1999a) Body size dimorphism and sexual segregation in polygynous ungulates: an experimental test with Soay sheep. Oecologia 120:258–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ (1999b) The relative roles of phylogeny, body size and feeding style on the activity time of temperate ruminants: a reanalysis. Oecologia 120:193–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ, Illius AW (2001) Phylogenetic analysis of stomach adaptation in digestive strategies in African ruminants. Oecologia 129:498–508

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Gordon IJ, Pagel M (2002) The origins of sexual dimorphism in body size in ungulates. Evolution 56:1276–1285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Elston DA, Gordon IJ, Illius AW (2004) The evolution of phylogenetic differences in the efficiency of digestion in ruminants. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 271:1081–1090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Robertson E, Gordon IJ (2005) Are social factors sufficient to explain sexual segregation in ungulates? Anim Behav 69:827–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Barbería FJ, Robertson E, Soriguer R, Aldezabal A, Mendizabal M, Pérez-Fernández E (2007) Why do polygynous ungulates segregate in space? Testing the activity budget hypothesis in Soay sheep. Ecol Monogr 77:631–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post DM, Armbrust TS, Horne EA, Goheen JR (2001) Sexual segregation results in differences in content and quality of bison (Bos bison) diets. J Mammal 82:407–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulliam HR, Caraco T (1984) Living in groups: is there optimal group size? In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Balckwell, Oxford, pp 122–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins CT (1993) Wildlife feeding and nutrition. Academic Press, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruckstuhl KE (1998) Foraging behaviour and sexual segregation in bighorn sheep. Anim Behav 56:99–106

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (2000) Sexual segregation in ungulates: a new approach. Behaviour 137:361–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (2002) Sexual segregation in ungulates: a comparative test of three hypotheses. Biol Rev 77:77–96

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (2005a) Activity asynchrony and social segregation. In: Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (eds) Sexual segregation in vertebrates: ecology of the two sexes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 165–179

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruckstuhl KE, Neuhaus P (2005b) Sexual segregation in vertebrates: ecology of the two sexes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Short HL (1963) Rumen fermentations and energy relationships and white-tailed deer. J Wildl Manage 27:184–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spaeth DF, Bowyer RT, Stephenson TR, Barboza PS (2004) Sexual segregation in moose Alces alces: an experimental manipulation of foraging behaviour. Wildl Biol 10:59–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokke S, du Toit JT (2002) Sexual segregation in habitat use by elephants in Chobe National Park, Botswana. Afr J Ecol 40:360–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Soest PJ (1963) Use of detergents in the analyses of fibrous feeds I a rapid method for the determination of fiber and lignin. J Assn Offic Agr Chem 46:829–835

    Google Scholar 

  • van Soest PJ (1982) Nutritional ecology of the ruminant. O & B Books, Corvallis

    Google Scholar 

  • van Soest PJ (1996) Allometry and ecology of feeding behavior and digestive capacity in herbivores: a review. Zoo Biol 15:455–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Soest PJ, Wine RH (1967) Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. IV. Determination of plant cell-wall constituents. J Assn Offic Anal Chem 50:50–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Weckerly FW (1993) Intersexual resource partitioning in black-tailed deer—a test of the body-size hypothesis. J Wildl Manage 57:475–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yearsley JM, Pérez-Barbería FJ (2005) Does the activity budget hypothesis explain sexual segregation in ungulates? Anim Behav 69:257–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Bob Mayes and Emily Green for their contribution to the alkanes analysis, Margaret Merchant in the running of the experiment, and the personnel of Glensaugh Research Station, Bettina Blanke, David Hamilton, and Donald Barrie. Craig MacEachern looked after the Soay sheep flock through the year. Jackie Potts provided statistical advice. The comments of Alan Duncan and three anonymous referees improved the drafts of this study. This research was funded by the Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department. B. A. -E. and E. P.-F. were granted with a European Union Leonardo da Vinci training fellowship. The experiment was carried out in accordance with the UK Home Office Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Macaulay Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen, AB15 8QH, UK

    F. J. Pérez-Barbería, E. Pérez-Fernández, E. Robertson & B. Alvarez-Enríquez

Authors
  1. F. J. Pérez-Barbería
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. Pérez-Fernández
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Robertson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B. Alvarez-Enríquez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. J. Pérez-Barbería.

Additional information

Communicated by Jörg Ganzhorn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pérez-Barbería, F.J., Pérez-Fernández, E., Robertson, E. et al. Does the Jarman–Bell principle at intra-specific level explain sexual segregation in polygynous ungulates? Sex differences in forage digestibility in Soay sheep. Oecologia 157, 21–30 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-008-1056-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-008-1056-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation