Animal social networks are robust to changing association definitions.

IF 1.9 2区 生物学 Q3 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-06 DOI:10.1007/s00265-025-03559-7
Alex Hoi Hang Chan, Jamie Dunning, Kristina B Beck, Terry Burke, Heung Ying Janet Chik, Daniel Dunleavy, Tim Evans, André Ferreira, Babette Fourie, Simon C Griffith, Friederike Hillemann, Julia Schroeder
{"title":"Animal social networks are robust to changing association definitions.","authors":"Alex Hoi Hang Chan, Jamie Dunning, Kristina B Beck, Terry Burke, Heung Ying Janet Chik, Daniel Dunleavy, Tim Evans, André Ferreira, Babette Fourie, Simon C Griffith, Friederike Hillemann, Julia Schroeder","doi":"10.1007/s00265-025-03559-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The interconnecting links between individuals in an animal social network are often defined by discrete, directed behaviours, but where these are difficult to observe, a network link (edge) may instead be defined by individuals sharing a space at the same time, which can then be used to infer a social association. The method by which these associations are defined should be informed by the biological significance of edges, and therefore often vary between studies. Identifying an appropriate measure of association remains a challenge to behavioural ecologists. Here, we use automatically recorded feeder visit data from four bird systems to compare three methods to identify a social association: (1) strict time-window, (2) co-occurrence in a group, and (3) arrival-time. We tested the similarity of the resulting networks by comparing the repeatability and sensitivity of individuals' social traits (network degree, strength, betweenness). We found that networks constructed using different methods but applying similar, ecologically relevant definitions of associations based on individuals' spatio-temporal co-occurrence, showed similar characteristics. Our findings suggest that the different methods to construct animal social networks are comparable, but result in subtle differences driven by species biology and feeder design. We urge researchers to carefully evaluate the ecological context of their study systems when making methodological decisions. Specifically, researchers in ecology and evolution should carefully consider the biological relevance of an edge in animal social networks, and the implications of adopting different definitions.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00265-025-03559-7.</p>","PeriodicalId":8881,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology","volume":"79 2","pages":"26"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11802709/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-025-03559-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The interconnecting links between individuals in an animal social network are often defined by discrete, directed behaviours, but where these are difficult to observe, a network link (edge) may instead be defined by individuals sharing a space at the same time, which can then be used to infer a social association. The method by which these associations are defined should be informed by the biological significance of edges, and therefore often vary between studies. Identifying an appropriate measure of association remains a challenge to behavioural ecologists. Here, we use automatically recorded feeder visit data from four bird systems to compare three methods to identify a social association: (1) strict time-window, (2) co-occurrence in a group, and (3) arrival-time. We tested the similarity of the resulting networks by comparing the repeatability and sensitivity of individuals' social traits (network degree, strength, betweenness). We found that networks constructed using different methods but applying similar, ecologically relevant definitions of associations based on individuals' spatio-temporal co-occurrence, showed similar characteristics. Our findings suggest that the different methods to construct animal social networks are comparable, but result in subtle differences driven by species biology and feeder design. We urge researchers to carefully evaluate the ecological context of their study systems when making methodological decisions. Specifically, researchers in ecology and evolution should carefully consider the biological relevance of an edge in animal social networks, and the implications of adopting different definitions.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00265-025-03559-7.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
146
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The journal publishes reviews, original contributions and commentaries dealing with quantitative empirical and theoretical studies in the analysis of animal behavior at the level of the individual, group, population, community, and species.
期刊最新文献
Is provisioning rate of parents and helpers influenced by the simulated presence of novel individuals? Animal social networks are robust to changing association definitions. Juveniles of a biparental cichlid fish compensate lack of parental protection by improved shoaling performance Three yellow patches differently correlate with escape behaviour, morphological traits, leukocytes, parasites, and hormones in a lizard species A behavioral syndrome of competitiveness in a non-social rodent
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1