IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0078951.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Aggregation to Dispersion: How Habitat Fragmentation Prevents the Emergence of Consensual Decision Making in a Group

Author

Listed:
  • Grégory Sempo
  • Stéphane Canonge
  • Jean-Louis Deneubourg

Abstract

In fragmented landscape, individuals have to cope with the fragmentation level in order to aggregate in the same patch and take advantage of group-living. Aggregation results from responses to environmental heterogeneities and/or positive influence of the presence of congeners. In this context, the fragmentation of resting sites highlights how individuals make a compromise between two individual preferences: (1) being aggregated with conspecifics and (2) having access to these resting sites. As in previous studies, when the carrying capacity of available resting sites is large enough to contain the entire group, a single aggregation site is collectively selected. In this study, we have uncoupled fragmentation and habitat loss: the population size and total surface of the resting sites are maintained at a constant value, an increase in fragmentation implies a decrease in the carrying capacity of each shelter. For our model organism, Blattella germanica, our experimental and theoretical approach shows that, for low fragmentation level, a single resting site is collectively selected. However, for higher level of fragmentation, individuals are randomly distributed between fragments and the total sheltered population decreases. In the latter case, social amplification process is not activated and consequently, consensual decision making cannot emerge and the distribution of individuals among sites is only driven by their individual propensity to find a site. This intimate relation between aggregation pattern and landscape patchiness described in our theoretical model is generic for several gregarious species. We expect that any group-living species showing the same structure of interactions should present the same type of dispersion-aggregation response to fragmentation regardless of their level of social complexity.

Suggested Citation

  • Grégory Sempo & Stéphane Canonge & Jean-Louis Deneubourg, 2013. "From Aggregation to Dispersion: How Habitat Fragmentation Prevents the Emergence of Consensual Decision Making in a Group," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-8, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0078951
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078951
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0078951
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0078951&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0078951?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mathieu Lihoreau & Colette Rivault, 2009. "Kin recognition via cuticular hydrocarbons shapes cockroach social life," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 20(1), pages 46-53.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pierre Broly & Jean-Louis Deneubourg, 2015. "Behavioural Contagion Explains Group Cohesion in a Social Crustacean," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas W. Scott & Alan Grafen & Stuart A. West, 2022. "Multiple social encounters can eliminate Crozier’s paradox and stabilise genetic kin recognition," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.

    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:plo:pone00:0078951. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.