4.5 Article

Meerkat helpers do not specialize in particular activities

Journal

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
Volume 66, Issue -, Pages 531-540

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1006/anbe.2003.2209

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Differences in the relative contributions of individual helpers to cooperative activities in vertebrate societies are sometimes interpreted as evidence of functional specialization and have been compared with the incipient subcaste systems found in some social insects. However, it is not yet clear whether some helpers specialize in particular tasks throughout their life span or whether variation in cooperative behaviour represents a temporary, age-related polyethism. We describe the development of cooperative behaviour in female helpers in meerkats, Suricata suricatta, an obligately cooperative mammal where young produced by the dominant female are reared by up to 30 helpers. Using a combination of field experiments and long-term records of the development of individuals, we investigated whether particular helpers specialize in particular activities. In the first year of life, variation in body weight affected overall levels of involvement in cooperative behaviour as well as relative contributions to different activities, generating contrasting activity profiles between light and heavy helpers. However, the effects of body weight disappeared by the second year of life, and individual differences in foraging success became the principal factor affecting contributions to cooperative behaviour. Contributions to different cooperative activities were positively correlated across individuals, with some helpers consistently contributing more than others to all cooperative activities. Our study provides no evidence that meerkat helpers specialize in particular cooperative activities. (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available