IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v13y2002i5p664-669.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conditional strategies in territorial defense: do Carolina wrens play tit-for-tat?

Author

Listed:
  • Jeremy Hyman

Abstract

Neighboring territorial animals are viewed primarily as intense rivals, but there are also opportunities for cooperation among competitors. Many animals respond less aggressively toward neighbors than to strangers. This phenomenon, termed the "dear enemy" effect, should be stable only when the reduced aggression is reciprocal. Territory owners should use conditional strategies in territorial defense, showing reduced aggression toward neighbors who cooperate by respecting territorial boundaries but increasing aggression toward invading neighbors. In this study I examined the response of territory owners to playbacks of neighbors at shared boundaries before and after intrusions by that neighbor or by strangers. Results showed that territory owners did not increase their aggression toward defecting neighbors but did increase their aggression toward neighbors after a simulated intrusion by a stranger. This surprising result might reflect the long-term relationship between neighboring Carolina wrens and the threat posed by rare intruding strangers. Copyright 2002.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeremy Hyman, 2002. "Conditional strategies in territorial defense: do Carolina wrens play tit-for-tat?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 13(5), pages 664-669, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:5:p:664-669
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:13:y:2002:i:5:p:664-669. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.