Russian Journal of Theriology. Main page    

Russian Journal of Theriology. Главная страница
Доступ к статьям
Электронная подача статей, правила для авторов и тп
Вход для рецензентов
Здесь можно подписаться на новостную рассылку RJT
Контактная информация

English version

The Mongolian gerbil phenomenon: Can the generally accepted conceptual models explain the evolution of sociality, helping and cooperation in this species?
Gromov V.S.
P. 44-54
The present article provides a compilation of the published data on the life history traits of the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus) related to sociality, helping and other cooperative behaviors. The evolution of sociality in rodents means the transition from solitary living to a family-group lifestyle. The Mongolian gerbil is a highly social and cooperative breeding species with the complicated social organization and biparental care. The most common social units of this species are extended family groups. Members of the family groups act cooperatively defending and marking their territories, maintaining nests, hoarding food, and raising young. Thus, the Mongolian gerbil is a species with high cooperative abilities. The generally accepted conceptual models relevant to the evolution of sociality among rodents do not explain the evolution of sociality in the Mongolian gerbil. Predation pressure and spatial distribution of food resources cannot be considered selective forces promoting the formation of family groups. Alloparental care, or helping, is not reproductive altruism in the Mongolian gerbil, and it seems unlikely that this behavior evolved merely due to kin selection under ‘Hamilton’s rule’. Cooperation is an immanent attribute of a family-group lifestyle. Complex forms of cooperation, in turn, contribute to the evolution of sociality. This evolutionary process can be thought of as some kind of ‘stimulation of similar with the similar’: pair bonding stimulates cooperation which in turn contributes to the formation of extended family groups typical of this species.

DOI: 10.15298/rusjtheriol.25.1.06

Литература

  • Ågren G., Zhou Q. & Zhong W. 1989a. Ecology and social behaviour of Mongolian gerbils, Meriones unguiculatus, at Xilinhot, Inner Mongolia, China // Animal Behaviour. Vol.37. P.11–27. DOI: 10.1016/0003-3472(89)90002-X

  • Ågren G., Zhou Q. & Zhong W. 1989b. Territoriality, cooperation and resource priority: hoarding in the Mongolian gerbils, Meriones unguiculatus // Animal Behaviour. Vol.37. P.28–32. DOI: 10.1016/0003-3472(89)90003-1

  • Ahern T.H., Hammock E.A.D. & Young L.J. 2011. Parental division of labor, coordination, and the effects of family structure on parenting in monogamous prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) // Developmental Psychobiology. Vol.53. P.118–131. DOI: 10.1002/dev.20498.

  • Alexander R.D. 1974. The evolution of social behavior // Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. Vol.5. P.325–383. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.es.05.110174.001545

  • Bannikov A.G. 1954. [Mammals of Mongolian People Republic.] Moscow: USSR Academy of Sciences. 670 p. [In Russian]

  • Barrett C.E., Keebaugh A.C., Ahern T.H., Bass C.E., Terwilliger E.F. & Young L.J. 2013. Variation in vasopressin receptor (Avpr1a) expression creates diversity in behaviors related to monogamy in prairie voles // Hormones and Behavior. Vol.63. P.518–526. DOI: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2013.01.005.

  • Bekoff M. 1996. Cognitive ethology, vigilance, information gathering, and representation: who might know what and why // Behavioral Processes. Vol.35. P.225–237. DOI: 10.1016/0376-6357(95)00050-x.

  • Berger J. 1978. Group size, foraging, and antipredator ploys: an analysis of bighorn sheep decisions // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.4. P.91–99. DOI: 10.1007/BF00302563

  • Bradbury J.W. & Vehrencamp S.L. 1977. Social organization and foraging in emballonurid bats. III Mating systems // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.2. P.1–17. DOI: 10.1007/BF00299284

  • Burda H., Honeycutt R.H., Begall S., Locker-Grütjen O. & Scharff A. 2000. Are naked and common mole-rats eusocial, and if so, why? // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.47. P.293–303. DOI: 10.1007/s002650050669

  • Carr G.M. & Macdonald D.W. 1986. The sociality of solitary foragers: a model based on resource dispersion // Animal Behaviour. Vol.34. P.1540–1549. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-3472(86)80223-8

  • Carter C.S. & Getz L.L. 1993. Monogamy and prairie vole // Scientific American. Vol.268. P.100–106. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0693-100

  • Carter C.S., De Vries A.C. & Getz L.L. 1995. Physiological substrates of mammalian monogamy: the prairie vole model // Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. Vol.19. P.303–314. DOI: 10.1016/0149-7634(94)00070-h

  • Carter C.S. & Roberts R.L. 1997. The psychobiology of cooperative breeding in rodents // Solomon N.G. & French J. (eds.). Cooperative breeding in mammals. New York: Cambridge University Press. P.231–266.

  • Charnov E.L. 1977. An elementary treatment of the genetical theory of kin selection // Journal of Theoretical Biology. Vol.66. P.541–550. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5193(77)90301-0

  • Clutton-Brock T.H. 1974. Primate social organization and ecology // Nature. Vol.250. P.539–542. DOI: 10.1038/250539a0

  • Clutton-Brock T.H. & Harvey P.H. 1976. Evolutionary rules and primate societies // Bateson P. & Hinde R.A. (eds.). Growing Points in Ethology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P.195–237.

  • Crook J.H. 1970a. Social organization and the environment: Aspects of contemporary social ethology // Animal Behaviour. Vol.18. P.197–209. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-3472(70)80029-X

  • Crook J.H. 1970b. The socio-ecology of primates // Crook J.H. (ed.). Social Behaviour in Birds and Mammals. London: Academic Press. P.103–156.

  • Crook J.H., Ellis J.E. & Goss-Custard J.D. 1976. Mammalian social systems: Structure and function // Animal Behaviour. Vol.24. P.261–274. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-3472(76)80035-8

  • Danielson B.J. & Gaines M.S. 1987. Spatial patterns in two synopsis species of microtines: Microtus ochrogaster and Synaptomys cooperi // Journal of Mammalogy. Vol.68. P.313–322. DOI: 10.2307/1381470

  • Davies N.B., Krebs J.R. & West S.A. 2012. An Introduction to Behavioural Ecology. 4th edition. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific. 586 p.

  • Deng K., Liu W. & Wang D. 2017a. Inter-group associations in Mongolian gerbils: Quantitative evidence from social network analysis // Integrative Zoology. Vol.12. P.446–456. DOI: 10.1111/1749-4877.12272.

  • Deng K., Liu W., Wang D. & Zheng X. 2017b. Effects of spatial and genetic distance on urine marking behavior in Mongolian gerbils at different life-history stages // Acta Theriologica Sinica Vol.37. P.344–353. DOI: 10.16829/j.slxb.201704004

  • Desportes J.P., Cézilly F. & Gallo A. 1991. Modeling and analyzing vigilance behavior // Acta Oecologica. Vol.12. P.227–236.

  • De Vos A. & Gillespie D.I. 1960. A study of woodchucks on an Ontario farm // Canadian Field Naturalist. Vol.74. P.130–145.

  • Downes S. & Hoefer A.M. 2004. Antipredatory behaviour in lizards: interactions between group size and predation risk // Animal Behaviour. Vol.67. P.485–492. DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.05.010

  • Ebensperger L.A. 1998. Sociality in rodents: The New World fossorial hystricognaths as study model // Revista Chilena Historia Natural. Vol.71. P.65–77.

  • Eisenberg J.F., Muckenhirn N.A. & Rudran R. 1972. The relation between ecology and social structure in primates // Science. Vol.176. P.863–874. DOI: 10.1126/science.176.4037.863

  • Elgar M.A. 1989. Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence // Biology Reviews. Vol.64. P.13–33. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1989.tb00636.x

  • Elwood R.W. 1975. Paternal and maternal behaviour in the Mongolian gerbil // Animal Behaviour. Vol.23. P.766–772. DOI: 10.1016/0003-3472(75)90104-9

  • Elwood R.W. 1979. Maternal and paternal behaviour of the Mongolian gerbil: A correlation study // Behavioral and Neural Biology. Vol.25. P.555–562.

  • Emlen S.T. 1991. Evolution of cooperative breeding in birds and mammals // Krebs J.R. & Davies N.B. (eds.). Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach. London: Blackwell Scientific. P.301–335.

  • French J.A. 1994. Alloparents in the Mongolian gerbil: impact on long-term reproductive performance of breeders and opportunities for independent reproduction // Behavioral Ecology. Vol.5. P.273–279. DOI: 10.1093/beheco/5.3.273

  • Geist V. 1974. On the relationship of social evolution and ecology of ungulates // American Zoologist. Vol.14. P.205–220.

  • Getz L.L. & McGuire B. 1997. Communal nesting in prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster): formation, composition, and persistence of communal groups // Canadian Journal of Zoology. Vol.75. P.525–534. DOI: 10.1139/z97-065

  • Getz L.L., Solomon N.G. & Pizzuto T.M. 1990. The effects of predation of snakes on social organization of the prairie vole, Microtus ochrogaster // American Midland Naturalist. Vol.123. P.365–371.

  • Getz L.L., McGuire B., Pizzuto T., Hofmann J.E. & Frase B. 1993. Social organization of the prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster) // Journal of Mammalogy. Vol.74. P.44–58. DOI: 10.2307/1381904

  • Grafen A. 1984. Natural selection, kin selection, and group selection // Krebs J.R. & Davies N.B. (eds.). Behavioral Ecology. An Evolutionary Approach. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific. P.62–84.

  • Gromov V.S. 2005. Parental care in captive Brandt’s vole (Lasiopodomys brandti) // Russian Journal of Theriology. Vol.4. P.137–145. DOI: 10.15298/rusjtheriol.04.2.06

  • Gromov V.S. 2008. [The Spatial-and-ethological Population Structure in Rodents]. Moscow: KMK Scientific Press. 586 p. [In Russian]. DOI: 10.1163/1568539X-00003439

  • Gromov V.S. 2009. Interactions of partners in family pairs, care of the offspring, and the role of tactile stimulation in formation of parental behaviour of the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus) under laboratory conditions // Biology Bulletin. Vol.36. P.479–488.

  • Gromov V.S. 2011a. Parental care, tactile stimulation and sociality evolution in rodents: Behavioural, physiological and developmental aspects. Saarbrücken: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. 104 p.

  • Gromov V.S. 2011b. Pair-bonding and parental care in cricetid rodents: A comparative study // Acta Theriologica. Vol.56. P.23–33. DOI: 10.1007/s13364-010-0013-x

  • Gromov V.S. 2013. Care of young and the effect of the presence of a male on parental behavior of the common vole (Microtus arvalis) in captivity // Contemporary Problems of Ecology. Vol.6. No.3. P.330–335. DOI: 10.1134/S1995425513030086

  • Gromov V.S. 2014. Complicated social structure and the evolution of sociality in rodents: Cooperation as the main promoting factor // Watson P. (ed.). Social Behavior: Evolutionary Pathways, Environmental Influences and Impairments. New York: Nova Science Publishers. P.71–119.

  • Gromov V.S. 2017. The evolution of sociality in rodents: A family affair // Russian Journal of Theriology. Vol.16. P.47–65. DOI: 10.15298/rusjtheriol.16.1.05

  • Gromov V.S. 2018. The evolution of sociality in rodents: Environments and selective forces promoting grouping. Mauritius: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing. 163 p.

  • Gromov V.S. 2020. Epigenetic programming of phenotypic differences in behaviour and the evolution of sociality in rodents // Biology Bulletin Reviews. Vol.10. P.338–350. DOI: 10.1134/S2079086420040027

  • Gromov V.S. 2022. Ecology and social behaviour of the Mongolian gerbil: A generalised review // Behaviour. Vol.159. P.403–441. DOI: 10.1163/1568539X-bja10128

  • Gromov V.S. 2023. Alloparental care in social muroid rodents // Russian Journal of Theriology. Vol.22. No.2. P.150–161. DOI: 10.15298/rusjtheriol.22.2.08

  • Grove M. 2012. Space, time, and group size: a model of constraints on primate social foraging // Animal Behaviour. Vol.83. P.411–419. DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.11.011

  • Gould L., Fedigan L.M. & Rose L.M. 1997. Why be vigilant: the case of the alpha animal // International Journal of Primatology. Vol.18. P.401–414. DOI: 10.1023/A:1026338501110

  • Hakkarainen H., Korpimaki E., Mappes T. & Palokangas P. 1992. Kestrel hunting behaviour towards solitary and grouped Microtus agrestis and M. epiroticus — a laboratory experiment // Annales Zoologici Fennici. Vol.29. P.279–284.

  • Hamilton W.D. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour // Journal of Theoretical Biology. Vol.7. P.1–52. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4

  • Hamilton W.D. 1971. Geometry for the selfish herd // Journal of Theoretical Biology. Vol.31. P.295–311. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5193(71)90189-5

  • Hass C.C. & Valenzuela D. 2002. Anti-predator benefits of group living in white-nosed coatis (Nasua narica) // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.51. P.570–578. DOI: 10.1007/s00265-002-0463-5

  • Holmes W.G. 1984. Sibling recognition in thirteen-lined ground squirrels: effects of genetic relatedness, rearing association, and olfaction // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.14. P.225–233. DOI: 10.1007/BF00299622

  • Hoogland J.L. 1979. The effect of the colony size on individual alertness of prairie dogs (Sciuridae: Cynomys spp.) // Animal Behaviour. Vol.27. P.394–407. DOI: 10.1016/0003-3472(79)90174-X

  • Hoogland J.L. 1981. The evolution of coloniality in white-tailed and black-tailed prairie dogs (Sciuridae: Cynomys leucurus and C. ludovicianus) // Ecology. Vol.62. P.252–272. DOI: 10.2307/1936685

  • Hoogland J.L. & Sherman P.W. 1976. Advantages and disadvantages of bank swallow (Riparia riparia) coloniality // Ecological Monographs. Vol.46. P.33–58. DOI: 10.2307/1942393

  • Ims R.A. 1987. Responses in spatial organization and behaviour to manipulations of food resource in the vole Clethrionomys rufocanus // Journal of Animal Ecology. Vol.56. P.585–596. DOI: 10.1007/BF02347854

  • Insel T.R., Preston S. & Winslow J.T. 1995. Mating in the monogamous male: behavioral consequences // Physiology & Behavior. Vol.57. P.615–627. DOI: 10.1016/0031-9384(94)00362-9

  • Jarman P.J. 1974. The social organisation of antelope in relation to their ecology // Behaviour. Vol.48. P.215–267. DOI: 10.1163/156853974X00345

  • Jarvis J.U.M., O

  • Jędrzejewski W., Jędrzejewska B. & McNeish E. 1992. Hunting success of the weasel Mustela nivalis and escape tactics of forest rodents in Białowieża National Park // Acta Theriologica. Vol.37. P.319–328. DOI: 10.4098/AT.arch.92-32

  • Jennions M.D. & Macdonald D.W. 1994. Cooperative breeding in mammals // Trends in Ecology and Evolution. Vol.9. P.89–93. DOI: 10.1016/0169-5347(94)90202-x

  • Johns D.W. & Armitage K.B. 1979. Behavioral ecology of alpine yellow-bellied marmots // Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. Vol.5. P.133–157. DOI: 10.1007/BF00293302

  • Johnson D.D.P., Kays R., Blackwell P.G. & MacDonald D.W. 2002. Does the resource dispersion hypothesis explain group living? // Trends in Ecology and Evolution. Vol.17. P.563–570. DOI: 10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02619-8

  • Keverne E.B., Martensz N. & Tuite B. 1989. Beta-endorphin concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid of monkeys are influenced by grooming relationships // Psychoneuroendocrinology. Vol.14. P.155–161. DOI: 10.1016/0306-4530(89)90065-6

  • Kleiman D.G. & Eisenberg J.F. 1973. Comparison of canid and felid social systems from an evolutionary perspective // Animal Behaviour. Vol.21. P.637–659. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-3472(73)80088-0

Скачать PDF