Communication, Science

New publication: Causal evidence for the adaptive benefits of social foraging in the wild

On 20-01-2021 the latest fruit of our Trinidadian guppy research project came online in the Open Access journal Communications Biology. With this experimental field study, we provide rare causal evidence for the adaptive benefits of social foraging in the wild. For both sexes!

For the complete story, check out the paper here.
For the popular science summary, check below (Dutch version here)

Guppies with friends eat more

Guppies that socialise with more conspecifics get more food. This applies to both males and females, despite the common assumption that males are not very social. This is revealed through a unique field study conducted by Wageningen University & Research in Trinidad in collaboration with Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries.

‘Much research has already been done under lab conditions on the impact of group size on animals’, says Lysanne Snijders. ‘Still, you never know whether the results such studies show, apply equally in nature’. Moreover, in the wild, other factors such as predators’ presence also influence animals’ social behaviour.

Three female Trinidadian guppies

Benefits of social behaviour

As far as we know, this is the first time a causal relationship was found between the number of animals of the same vertebrate species and it’s benefits to individuals. In Trinidad, Snijders and her colleagues were able to get a close look at the influence of size and composition of groups under natural circumstances by distributing the guppies over different pools. The behaviour of the fish in different group sizes was extensively analysed and recorded.

Snijders and her team showed that guppies living in larger groups were often more successful at obtaining food. From an evolutionary perspective this is interesting: apparently, an increased food intake is a direct benefit of being social in the wild (as is protection from predators), and may thus partly explain why we often see guppies engage in social associations.

Our fieldwork site in the Trinidad rainforest

Males

Moreover, the study, published in Communication Biology, shows that males and females alike benefit from larger groups. This is remarkable, as females are generally perceived as more social.

Snijders: ‘In the vast majority of guppy research, the study is limited to females because males are thought to be predominantly occupied with mating opportunities. This study, under natural circumstances, clearly shows that males also benefit from social behaviour and that this advantage is not solely restricted to them obtaining females. Assumptions about a lower level of sociability do thus not necessarily translate into fewer social benefits.’

Guppies eating a berry they just found

Reference

Snijders, L., Krause, S., Tump, A.N. et al. Causal evidence for the adaptive benefits of social foraging in the wild. Commun Biol 4, 94 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-020-01597-7

Communication, Conservation

Exploring Conservation Conflicts: New format

For our Exploring Conservation Conflicts blog, we are trying out a new format: personal contributions. We already got two wonderful personal stories tackling very different but important questions in conservation. Check them out!

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges humans have ever faced. This exploration is a personal account of the role that climate change plays in the daily life of researcher Dr Yann Gager. Yann explains to us what individual researchers can (and should?) do to help the fight against climate change. Read more

flatten the curveIn conservation, often a choice has to be made for the lesser of two evils. How can conservationists cope with such situations of seemingly inevitable loss? Here, we share a personal contribution from Dr Chelsea Batavia, in which she takes us along in the background story of her recent publication The moral residue of conservation, addressing exactly this issue. Read more

Communication, Conservation, Science

The case of cats and conservation

Tanja and I explored another conservation conflict on our Medium blog.

When a potential response to an urgent situation is either unlikely to work at all or unlikely to address the bulk of the problem, under what conditions should we try it anyway?

In this exploration, we wanted to share perspectives on the controversial case of cats in Australia, also by some called the ‘war against cats’. In 2015, the Australian Government launched the threatened species strategy to kill 2 Mio cats in Australia by 2020 with the aim to protect endemic wildlife. Four years after the strategy was launched, Australian researchers in Conservation Letters questioned the motives (conservation or politically driven) and the science behind the decision.

Just how much of a sensitive topic this particular case study is, we noticed by how difficult it was for us to find contributors. Luckily we found two experts from Moral Philosophy that shared their insight with us:

Carlos Gray Santana is an Assistant Professor in Philosophy at the University of Utah. Dr Santana’s uses ethics to shed light on complicated issues such as the environment and human cognition. William S. Lynn is a Research Scientist in the George Perkins Marsh Institute at Clark University. The focus of Bill’s work is the ethics and politics of animal protection and sustainability.

For optional guidance, we asked the experts the following questions:

  • Why is the matter of cats and wildlife so controversial?
  • Why do you think politicians focus on culling cats rather than on habitat loss (as suggested in Doherty et al. 2019) and could open discussions be fostered to move beyond culling?
  • How do you think the public would respond when culling of cats turns out not to be effective in halting endemic species decline?

Curious about what they had to say? Read our blog post here.
And you can also follow us on Twitter!

Photo credits: Pacto Visual on Unsplash

Communication, Conservation

The return of the ‘beast’?

We (Tanja and I) just published a new conservation conflict exploration on our Medium blog!

We asked three experts from the fields of Human Dimensions, Wildlife Research and Moral Philosophy to share their perspectives with us on a particular case study:

Germany relaxes rules on shooting wolves

“After a emotional debate pitting environmental against farming concerns, the government decided that wolves can now be shot if they cause “serious damage” to livestock farmers.

In cases of repeated attacks against sheep flocks or cattle herds, individuals can be hunted down even if it is unclear which animal in a pack was responsible.”

We asked the experts:

  1. Why do people struggle so much with the return of wolves?
  2. Should killing of wolves in Germany be allowed/legal?
  3. What would be the best first step(s) to address this conflict in Germany or other countries in similar situations?

Curious about what they had to say? Read our blog post here!
You can also follow us on Twitter.

Photo credits: Jana Malin; mythos-wolf.de

Communication, Conservation

Culling hyenas to save horses

We (Tanja and I) just published our very first conservation conflict exploration on our Medium blog!

We asked three experts from the fields of Human Dimensions, Wildlife Research and Moral Philosophy to share their perspectives with us on a particular case study:

Namibia starts controversial hyena cull to save its wild horses

“Shooting hyenas to save wild horses raises heated debate about whether conservation authorities should intervene between endemic wildlife and ‘feral’ animals.”

Please follow this link for more details.

namibia-2049221_1920_PixaBay
Namib desert horses (Equus ferus caballus)

We asked the experts:

  1. What approach would you recommend decision-makers to take to best address this conflict?
  2. Why this approach (e.g. which processes, perspectives or values should be prioritized in your view)?
  3. What should be the first step?

Curious about what they had to say? Read our blog post here!
You can also follow us on Twitter.

Photo credits: Hyena Project – Oliver Höner; Pixabay