Neuroecology of Competitor Recognition

• Published in: Integrative and comparative biology Vol. 51; no. 5; pp. 807 - 818
• Main Author: Grether, Gregory F
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Oxford University Press 01.11.2011; Oxford Publishing Limited (England)
• Subjects: Aggression; allopatry; Animal behavior; Animal cognition; Animals; Ants; Ants - chemistry; Ants - physiology; Biological Evolution; Bird songs; birds; Birds - physiology; case studies; Caudata; color; Competitive Behavior - physiology; Cues; Ecology; evolution; Evolutionary biology; Female animals; fish; Formicidae; genes; Genotype & phenotype; Insect colonies; Male animals; Mating behavior; Nervous System Physiological Phenomena; Neuroecology: Neural Determinants of Ecological Processes from Individuals to Ecosystems; peptides; Perception; Phenotype; Pheromones; Pheromones - chemistry; Pheromones - physiology; proteins; Recognition (Psychology); Salamanders; salamanders and newts; Scincidae; Species; Species Specificity; sympatry; territoriality; Urodela - physiology; Vomeronasal Organ - physiology; Zygoptera; ISEW, Australia, Queensland, Great Barrier Reef, Salamander Reef
• ISSN: 1540-7063; 1557-7023
• DOI: 10.1093/icb/icr060

Territorial animals can be expected to distinguish among the types of competitors and noncompetitors that they encounter on a regular basis, including prospective mates and rivals of their own species, but they may not correctly classify individuals of other species. Closely related species often have similar phenotypes and this can cause confusion when formerly allopatric populations first come into contact. Errors in recognizing competitors can have important ecological and evolutionary effects. I review what is known about the mechanisms of competitor recognition in animals generally, focusing on cases in which the targets of recognition include other species. Case studies include damselflies, ants, skinks, salamanders, reef fishes, and birds. In general, recognition systems consist of a phenotypic cue (e.g., chemical, color, song), a neural template against which cues are compared, a motor response (e.g., aggression), and sensory integration circuits for context dependency of the response (if any). Little is known about how competitor recognition systems work at the neural level, but inferences about specificity of cues and about sensory integration can be drawn from the responses of territory residents to simulated intruders. Competitor recognition often involves multiple cues in the same, or different, sensory modalities. The same cues and templates are often, but not always, used for intraspecific and interspecific recognition. Experiments have shown that imprinting on local cues is common, which may enable templates to track evolved changes in cues automatically. The dependence of aggression and tolerance on context is important even in the simplest systems. Species in which mechanisms of competitor recognition are best known offer untapped opportunities to examine how competitor-recognition systems evolve (e.g., by comparing allopatric and sympatric populations). Cues that are gene products (peptides, proteins) may provide insights into rates of evolution. There are many avenues for further research on the important but understudied question of how animals recognize competitors.