Search USGS⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70193659

Pectoral fin contact as a mechanism for social bonding among dolphins

Kathleen Dudzinski·Christine Ribic
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Bottlenose dolphins are large-brained social mammals residing in a fission-fusion society with relationships that are established and maintained over decades. We examined a decade-long data set of inter-individual pectoral fin contact exchanges to better understand how dolphins share information via tactile contact. Sex and age are significant factors in pectoral fin contact within non-kin dolphin dyads. Adult females shared more pectoral fin contacts with other adult females, while younger females showed no pattern of contact. Males shared more pectoral fin contacts with other males as juveniles and as adults, but showed no difference in the number of touches versus rubs as pectoral fin contacts with other males. Whether in the role of initiator as rubber or initiator as rubbee, male dolphins again preferred other males. These results support the notion that dolphins, especially male dolphins, might use pectoral fin contact as one tool in their repertoire for social bonding to establish, maintain and manage their inter-individual relationships. Additionally, it is also likely that the exchange of pectoral fin contact is developed and refined as individuals age, mature socially, and establish their place within a fission-fusion society.

Explore related subjects

Animal Behavior and CognitionArticle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kathleen Dudzinski, Christine Ribic. 2017-02-01. Pectoral fin contact as a mechanism for social bonding among dolphins. https://doi.org/10.12966/abc.03.02.2017

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2022

Are wild wolves southpaws? Including potential conservation implications

Lateralization, or a left-right bias in behavior (e.g., handedness), was originally thought to exclusively exist in humans, but is now known to be widespread. Lateralization can exist at the individual or group level. In dogs ( Canis lupus familiaris ), tests of paw preference have produced inconsistent results. Because wolves ( C. l. ) differ genetically, morphologically, and behaviorally from dogs, I was interested in assessing them for lateralization. I examined lateralization (right versus left) of the foot captured (a step test analog) of wild wolves ( n = 93) trapped for radiocollaring purposes in the Superior National Forest, Minnesota from 2011 – 2017 and 2019. No support was found for lateralization, and sex and age class were not significant predictors of which foot was captured. Because many mammals demonstrate lateralization, and because population-level lateralization is thought to convey increased social cohesion, it is surprising that wild wolves did not demonstrate population level lateralization. This step test analog may not have been an appropriate measure (as lateralization is task dependent) and / or wolf lateralization may exist at the individual level, but not the population level. Future work on wolf lateralization at both the individual and population levels examining pawedness via multiple tasks while accounting for potential confounding factors (such as different rearing conditions and methods) could provide clarification. Examining potential trade-offs between the costs and benefits of lateralization that these highly social animals may incur would be very interesting in terms of evolution and in comparison with dogs. Furthermore, because lateralization has been connected to emotional functioning and animal welfare, baseline lateralization data from wild wolves may inform captive wolf management and conservation, including the captive breeding programs for endangered Mexican wolves ( C. l. baileyi ) and red wolves ( C. rufus ) and other programs (e.g., educational facilities).

Animal Behavior and Cognition↗
USGS2021

Wolf use of humanmade objects during pup-rearing

Some animals use humanmade objects for building and constructing nests or shelter and even for play. Gray wolves ( Canis lupus ) gather and use humanmade objects discovered in their natural environment. Gathering humanmade objects is a peculiar behavior particularly when there is no immediately apparent benefit to survival or reproduction. I opportunistically documented 46 different types of humanmade objects with plastic bottles and aluminum cans being the most common items found at wolf pup-rearing sites. Many objects were made of materials that appeared suitable to alleviate pain in teething pups. For some objects, however, it was not immediately obvious that they would alleviate teething pain due to their unpliable material. Additionally, such objects were quite rare in wolves’ natural environment although it was not uncommon to find them at pup-rearing sites. Rare humanmade objects may provide a novelty that stimulates pups more than common objects. I hypothesize that objects used by wolf pups 1) alleviate pain from teething, and 2) provide adults respite from energetic pups. The latter is an important distinction because it implies the benefit of object play is to the adults and not the pups per se. Gathering novel objects that occupy energetic and hungry pups may influence the overall ability of social carnivores to leave young unattended while they hunt, to rest upon their return, and ultimately rear young successfully.

Animal Behavior and Cognition↗
USGS2021

Evidence for maternal style among adult female dolphins when sharing pectoral fin contacts with their calves

Adult bottlenose dolphins share pectoral fin contacts (PFC) to manage their social relationships but less is known about how mothers share PFC with their calves. Using a dataset collected over 16 years, we analyzed how 10 matrilines, including three second generation female dolphins in a maternal role, used PFC with their pre-weaned calves. Mothers had different rates of initiation with their calves forming a continuum from those initiating few contacts (15%) to those initiating more (44%). For mothers with all-aged calves, the lateral side was contacted the most to start interactions with mothers contacting body parts at a similar rate. All mothers assumed the same posture regardless of their role as initiator or receiver, with horizontal the most prevalent posture. Two maternal styles were found for PFC: high and low use of PFC. Within the high PFC group, there was individual variation that was related to calf sex. Even though evidence of maternal style was confirmed in PFC exchanges between adult female dolphins and their calves, the number of PFC shared between these kin was only ~9% of all documented PFC contacts (N = 4,345) over 16 years, suggesting that other forms of tactile contact may be more important within the confines of the mother-offspring relationship in delphinids.

Bailey’s Key, Roatan↗