The mismeasure of animal contests

By Phillip W Taylor, R. W. Elwood. 2003

312 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4b1520645760818b846ae7ff1202b6d1f99de3fb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

Difficulties remain in distinguishing between mutual and self-assessment in animal contests (2009, methodology): “…& Elwood (2003) used simulation models to show that if this relationship is strong enough, the apparent negative relationship between RHP difference and contest duration could be an artefact of a stronger positive relationship between loser absolute RHP and contest duration (Taylor & Elwood 2003).”
Size differences within a dominance hierarchy influence conflict and help in a cooperatively breeding cichlid (2005, background): “This is a problem for studies of relative size and conflict in general (Taylor & Elwood, 2003).”
Effects of isotocin on social responses in a cooperatively breeding fish (2012, methodology): “If the asymmetry in size between the two competitors was an important factor determining the contestants’ behaviour, then we would expect to observe a positive effect of own body size on aggression and a negative relationship between opponent body size and aggression (Taylor & Elwood 2003).”
Rules of engagement for resource contests in a social fish (2011, background): “Mutual assessment is both intuitively satisfying and the dominant paradigm used to explain animal contests (Taylor & Elwood 2003).”
Switching assessment strategy during a contest: fighting in killifish Kryptolebias marmoratus (2008, background): “Contest duration should have a strong positive relationship with the size of the smaller contestant but a weaker or even insignificant positive relationship with the size of the larger contestant because the smaller contestant is likely to retreat first (Taylor & Elwood 2003).”
Fighting in fiddler crabs Uca mjoebergi: what determines duration? (2005, methodology): “To investigate such effects on the duration of contests, we provide a second modification to the Taylor & Elwood (2003) model, in which fighting is size-assortative, and persistence is based on individual, size-determined, costs thresholds, but larger rivals inflict costs at a higher rate.”
Self-assessment by males during energetically costly contests over precopula females in amphipods (2006, background): “However, eventual winners are likely to be only slightly larger than these (Taylor & Elwood 2003).”
Fighting for harems: assessment strategies during male–male contests in the sexually dimorphic Wellington tree weta (2006, unknown): “Self-assessment (own RHP-dependent persistence; Taylor & Elwood 2003) is supported because contest duration strongly increased with smaller rival RHP (or loser RHP).”
Intelligent Data Analysis of Intelligent Systems (2010, background): “Much is understood about control mechanisms [19], [6], [7], [22], factors driving escalation of pair-wise contests [8], [9], [10], [20], the influence of third parties on conflict outcome through coalition formation [12], [13], audience [14], [15], reputation effects [16], and redirected aggression ”
Modulation of aggressive behaviour by fighting experience: mechanisms and contest outcomes (2005, background): “In practice, it may be difficult to discriminate assessment from non-assessment explanations based on contest outcomes (Taylor & Elwood, 2003).”
Male signaling behavior and sexual selection in a wolf spider (Araneae: Lycosidae): a test for dual functions (2007, background): “Because greater body mass is associated with outcome of male–male interactions, it seems more likely that intrasexual selection is influenced by size, as appears typical for many animals, including spiders (Taylor and Elwood 2003; Bel-Venner and Venner 2006).”
Fighting behavior in hermit crabs: the combined effect of resource-holding potential and resource value in Pagurus longicarpus (2006, unknown): “The idea of an individual’s ‘own RHP-dependent persistence’ (Taylor and Elwood 2003) has been incorporated into several theoretical models, e.g. ‘war of attrition without assessment’ (Mesterton-Gibbons et al. 1996) and ‘energetic war of attrition’ (e.g. Payne and Pagel 1996) models.”
Chemosensory assessment of rival competitive ability and scent-mark function in a lizard, Podarcis hispanica (2007, result): “…use experimental designs where resource-holding potential differences do not correlate with the resource-holding potential of the experimental subject (Taylor & Elwood 2003), for example by using experimental males of approximately the same size or fixing size differences, as in the present study.”