Good vibrations by the beach boys : magnitude of substrate vibrations is a reliable indicator of male grey seal size
MetadataShow full item record
Communication via substrate vibrations can convey information on conspecific presence, individual quality, group cohesion and/or allow for predator avoidance. Although studies have identified that various species use this modality, few studies on mammalian taxa have investigated whether the information contained in substrate vibrations is a reliable indicator of resource-holding potential (RHP). The grey seal, Halichoerus grypus, breeding colony at Donna Nook, U.K., is part of a limited geographical region where the Body Slap (BS) behaviour is performed during male–male conflicts. This behaviour is thought to have a mechanical component. We examined whether the magnitude of the BS substrate vibrations contained reliable information on male mass and size as measures of RHP, and whether reliability varied across environmental conditions. To test this, we deployed seismometers during the breeding season that recorded continuous seismic data over a frequency bandwidth of 0.03–500 Hz. Locations and times of BS events performed by individual males were recorded, matched with the seismic data, and a distance-corrected magnitude was calculated for each event. Our results demonstrate the BS generates a stereotyped seismic signature measurable up to 126.3 m away. We found a positive correlation between the maximum and mean magnitudes of the substrate-borne vibrations and a male's length. Dampness of the sand substrate had no effect on magnitude. Results of this study confirm that the maximum magnitude substrate vibrations generated by the BS behaviour is an indicator of male size and that the substrate-borne vibrations are reliable across varying environmental conditions.
Bishop , A , Denton , P , Pomeroy , P & Twiss , S 2015 , ' Good vibrations by the beach boys : magnitude of substrate vibrations is a reliable indicator of male grey seal size ' Animal Behaviour , vol 100 , pp. 74-82 . DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.11.008
© 2015. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Animal Behaviour. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Ecological Animal Behaviour, 100, February 2015 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.11.008
This work was supported by an equipment loan from the NERC SEIS UK, equipment facility (Loan no. 928) and the Durham Doctoral Studentship.
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.