Author
Listed:
- Nadine Schubert
- Carolin Stober
- Maibrit Born
- Francis Mwanguhya
- Robert Businge
- Solomon Kyabulima
- Kenneth Mwesige
- Michael A Cant
- Hazel J Nichols
- Jamie C Winternitz
Abstract
Olfactory cues play a vital role in mammalian social communication, conveying fitness-relevant information such as genetic quality and relatedness. Kin recognition through scent can help avoid inbreeding and guide nepotistic behaviors, enhancing fitness. In banded mongooses, synchronized breeding disrupts familiarity-based kin recognition, potentially increasing reliance on phenotype matching, where individuals compare genetically determined odors to assess similarity. We tested whether banded mongooses use odors to assess genetic diversity and relatedness based on (i) major histocompatibility complex (MHC) genotypes and (ii) neutral microsatellite loci. Results showed individuals responded differently to odors from unfamiliar conspecifics based on MHC diversity and relatedness. Specifically, less MHC-diverse and less related individuals attracted more interest, suggesting odor cues are used to evaluate intruder or competitor threat levels. Neutral genetic diversity did not affect odor responses and was not correlated with MHC diversity, indicating responses to MHC diversity are independent of overall genetic diversity. No effect of MHC similarity was observed, possibly due to sample size limitations. Our findings suggest MHC diversity may signal genetic quality, whereas other genomic regions might contribute to assessing relatedness. These results provide a foundation for further research into the role of MHC and other genes in social communication in species where phenotype matching offers adaptive benefits.
Suggested Citation
Nadine Schubert & Carolin Stober & Maibrit Born & Francis Mwanguhya & Robert Businge & Solomon Kyabulima & Kenneth Mwesige & Michael A Cant & Hazel J Nichols & Jamie C Winternitz, 2026.
"Banded mongooses discriminate relatedness and MHC diversity in unfamiliar conspecifics,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 37(1), pages 144.-144..
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:37:y:2026:i:1:p:araf144.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:37:y:2026:i:1:p:araf144.. 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.