A dog & canine forum. DogBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » DogBanter forum » Dog forums » Dog behavior
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Pack power: The wolves of Yellowstone provide some surprising survival lessons



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 31st 15, 02:49 PM posted to rec.pets.dogs.behavior
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Pack power: The wolves of Yellowstone provide some surprising survival lessons

(The Economist, May 30th 2015)

Don't let the grey hair fool you

Like people, wolves have found that there are benefits to be had
living in a group. Together they can more effectively take down large
prey, raise families and defend their territory. The received wisdom
is that there are also costs to group living, not least a greater risk
of death from catching a contagious disease. Now a team of ecologists
working in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming have found evidence
that for wolves, at least, that is not always the case.

Wolves were driven to extinction by hunting in the Yellowstone region
in the early 20th century, but were reintroduced in 1995 and have been
closely monitored ever since by the National Park Service. This
includes tranquillising 25 or so wolves a year and fitting them with
radio collars so they can be tracked. Among the wealth of information
this effort has produced, in 2007 researchers were alerted to a
contagious illness creeping into the population.

Known as mange, the disease is caused by parasitic mites that burrow
into the flesh of wolves, causing an extreme allergic reaction and
driving them to scratch to the point of losing large amounts of their
fur. Left untreated, the mites weaken the animals they infect, making
them vulnerable to starvation and more diseases.

The researchers, led by Emily Almberg of Pennsylvania State
University, expected to see mange appear with greater frequency in
large wolf packs rather than small ones. The larger packs, after all,
had more wolves roving across the landscape, and thus a greater chance
of one of their number coming into contact with the mites and
spreading the disease to the others. But that is not what the
researchers found.

Wolves living in large packs were no more likely to become infected by
the mites than those in small packs or living on their own, the team
report in Ecology Letters. Why this is so remains to be determined,
but Dr Almberg suspects that it has something to do with territorial
behaviour. The wolves avoid contact with other packs which, in turn,
limits opportunities for disease transmission.

More intriguing, though, was the discovery that wolves living in a
large group were better at fending off the disease. Wolves living in
packs were five times less likely to die from mange than wolves that
caught it whilst living on their own. "We saw wolves missing hair on
over half of their bodies in the middle of winter surviving the season
just as well as uninfected wolves, so long as they were living in a
large group," says Dr Almberg. She thinks this is due to other wolves
being available to help the ill ones find and catch food.

When it comes to fighting for territory, another study has found the
composition of the pack matters as well as its size. A team of
ecologists led by Kira Cassidy of the University of Minnesota report
in Behavioral Ecology that in an analysis of 121 conflicts between
Yellowstone wolves, larger packs (with an average of 9.4 wolves) were,
as might be expected, more likely to win over a small pack (5.8
wolves). Nevertheless, two factors could change the outcome
considerably.

The first was that males matter. Wolf packs with a greater proportion
of adult males, even if the pack itself was smaller than those they
took on, stood a good chance of defeating their rivals. Statistically,
Ms Cassidy was able to work out that having one more adult male than a
rival pack of a similar size increased the chances of victory by 65%.

The second finding was that the presence of a wolf (of any gender)
that was aged six or older has a bigger impact on the odds of victory
than a straightforward numerical advantage. Ms Cassidy found that in a
fight between two packs without any of these older wolves, one with
five members and the other six, the larger group would be 140% more
likely to win. If two packs of equal size went head-to-head, the
presence of an older animal in one group would increase the chance of
that pack winning by a very useful 150%.

As the average lifespan of a wolf in Yellowstone is four years, once
infant mortality is excluded, the old wolves that appear to tip the
balance during battles are at least two years past their prime. It
seems unlikely that they lend brawn to the fight as much as some sort
of experience. Whether that is by imparting improved combat tactics to
their packmates or because they are more effective fighters due to
years of practice is unclear. There are more lessons to be learned
from Yellowstone's wolves.

--
Bob
Age and guile beat youth and energy.
www.kanyak.com
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
surprising behavior diddy[_2_] Dog behavior 1 January 13th 09 07:21 AM
My company provide most popular of the shoes model, bag, clothes,Bikini swimwear, sunglasses and watch of etc.. [email protected] Dog health 0 November 30th 07 02:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 (Unauthorized Upgrade)
Copyright ©2004-2024 DogBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.