Back

To be unique or blend in: dynamics of male African elephant character durability across time and social contexts

O'Connell-Rodwell, C. E.; Berezin, J. L.; Kinzley, C.; Freeman, P. T.; Sandri, M. N.; Kieschnick, D.; Abarca, M.; Hayssen, V.

2024-05-26 animal behavior and cognition
10.1101/2024.05.24.595367 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Post-dispersal male African elephants (Loxodonta africana) live within complex social networks. To quantify the durability of male elephant character (or personality) within these networks, we employed behavioral repeatability analysis tools across social and environmental contexts. We collected behavioral data from thirty-four individually-identified male elephants at the same waterhole over five field seasons (2007-2011) in Etosha National Park, Namibia. Using repeatability models to assess ten behavioral categories, we found five behaviors (affiliation, aggression, dominance, self-directed anxious, and self-directed comfort) were consistent at the individual level. Interestingly, some of these behaviors were also significantly repeatable, depending on social context. In particular, the presence of younger males and a keystone male (i.e., the most dominant and socially-integrated individual during our study period) had the biggest impact on adult male behaviors. Surprisingly, the presence of elephants in musth had little impact. Finally, we found that younger individuals were more alike in their overall character profiles than older males, further supporting the hypothesis that male elephants develop unique, yet socially-flexible character types as they age. These results demonstrate that male elephants possess distinct character traits that are also behaviorally adaptable, depending on the social context. Overall, our research further uncovers the complexity of male elephant individuality and social dynamics that can be leveraged to improve in-situ and ex-situ management and conservation decisions for the species.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.