1964
DOI: 10.1016/0003-3472(64)90044-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The communal organisation of solitary mammals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
41
0

Year Published

1973
1973
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The carrying capacity of the mesic habitats of O. irroratus is perennially high and stable, and the species is A'-selected . The complex social organization includes multiple home range overlap and temporal territoriality (Davis 1972) as defined by Leyhausen (1965), intrasexual defence of a small area around the nest by breeding females, and hierarchical relationships among breeding males (Davis 1973).…”
Section: Comparison With O Irroratusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The carrying capacity of the mesic habitats of O. irroratus is perennially high and stable, and the species is A'-selected . The complex social organization includes multiple home range overlap and temporal territoriality (Davis 1972) as defined by Leyhausen (1965), intrasexual defence of a small area around the nest by breeding females, and hierarchical relationships among breeding males (Davis 1973).…”
Section: Comparison With O Irroratusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some species, such as lions (Panthera leo) (Schaller, 1972), resident males may appropriate food acquired by females. In other species, resident males may not completely exclude other males (Rood and Waser, 1978) or may defend areas only temporarily (Leyhausen, 1965). Carnivore species where active intersexual competition for food or resources has been reported were not recorded as showing indirect male investment in the analysis that follows.…”
Section: Measuring Male Parental Investmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…That is, they responded in a way similar to the over marking shown by many other species (e.g. Leyhausen 1965;Johnson 1973;Müller-Schwarze et al 1973;Rasa 1973;Butler and Butler 1979;Biben 1980;Hurst 1987;Johnston et al 1994;Johnston et al 1995). Also, the lack of a response to ESM's without castoreum 11 indicated that beaver were responding to the smell of castoreum and not to the sight of the scent mound.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 61%