Breeding groups with multiple stallions occur sympatrically with single-stallion breeding groups in feral horse, Equus caballus, populations. Mutualism and reciprocal altruism between stallions have been proposed to explain the origin and functioning of multistallion bands. However, empirical support for these hypotheses is contradictory and incomplete. Furthermore, there are no explicit tests of the predictions that each hypothesis makes about stallion behaviour and social structure. We compared nine multistallion and 18 single-stallion bands in the Kaimanawa Ranges, New Zealand. Compared with agonistic behaviours, affiliative behaviours were relatively unimportant in the relationships between stallions within bands. The number of stallions in the band did not have a positive influence on mare group size, stability, home range quality or reproductive success in bands. Furthermore, there was a positive relationship between aggression ('intolerance') by the dominant towards subordinate stallions and the subordinates' effort in mare group defence ('helping') but a negative relationship between helping effort by subordinates and their proximity to, and mating with, the bands' mares. Therefore, the predictions of the mutualism and reciprocal altruism hypotheses were not supported. Indeed, for some of the predictions we found the opposite outcomes to be true. Multistallion bands had significantly poorer reproductive success, and dominant stallions were less tolerant of subordinates that helped most and reduced their access to mares. Nevertheless, in all other respects Kaimanawa stallions in multistallion bands behaved like those described elsewhere. Thus, we reject cooperative hypotheses for multimale breeding groups in horses and discuss the mate parasitism and consort hypotheses as better alternatives. Copyright 2000 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2014.
All research outputs
#25,000,345
of 27,784,943 outputs
Outputs from Animal Behaviour
#6,088
of 6,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,555
of 124,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Behaviour
#22
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,784,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,224 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 124,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
