4.3 Article

Fighting behaviour in territorial male roe deer Capreolus capreolus:: the effects of antler size and residence

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE RESEARCH
Volume 53, Issue 1, Pages 1-8

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10344-006-0053-3

Keywords

Capreolus capreolus; fighting behaviour; roe deer; Norway; ungulate

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In all areas where they have been studied, male roe deer are believed to have a territorial mating system, although few quantitative studies have been conducted and there remains considerable debate about the function of male roe deer territories. We observed 139 aggressive interactions between male roe deer in Storfosna Island (Norway) during one territorial season (March-August). We recognised seven rank levels of escalation according to the potential danger of the behaviour. On the basis of the number of escalation levels included in the interactions, the complexity of the fights was also scored. We recorded the presence of other individuals during the interaction, the age, the antler size, the territorial status and the residency status of the two contestants and tested how these variables affected escalation, complexity and outcome of the fights. Most of the interactions ended with low levels of escalation, and physical contact occurred only in fights between two territorial bucks. The escalation was also affected by the difference in antler size index (the bucks escalated more when the difference in antler size was smaller) and increased with an increasing number of female deer present during the interaction. The resident buck won in 81% of the fights. When it drew or lost, it was generally both inferior in age and antler size, and the duration and escalation of the interactions were higher. However, even when a fight was lost, no territory loss occurred. These results are consistent with the evolutionary game theory and the proposed low risk-low gain strategy of roe deer bucks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available