RE: Seasonal "Day Care" Hypothesis for Maiasaura

["Ken Kinman" <kinman@hotmail.com>]

Thanks Carl,
    Your points are well taken.  I was thinking that this might be a 
"semi-social" or "quasi-social" kind of situation (I think E.O. Wilson used 
those terms for some insects that are not completely eusocial, but still 
show varying degrees of cooperation).
    The guards might defend the egg field until the return of all the 
mothers, and at that point the bird-like squabbling between individuals 
might resume.  Even within a species there can be differing degrees of 
sociality at different times of year or under other differing circumstances. 
 If predators were to threaten the colony, the squabbling might temporarily 
cease and possibly even some cooperation as long as the threat lasts (but we 
probably will never know).  For example, some birds might be squabbling away 
one minute, and minutes later cooperating to drive off a menacing crow or 
hawk.
    My reasoning for limiting the numbers of guards is presumed scarcity of 
food (the reason most of the herd had to migrate).  And being buried, the 
eggs would not require parental incubation (as you pointed out), just some 
guarding to minimize losses to the colony as a whole.  This would be 
beneficial to the species' survival, even if the guarding was less 
successful in some years than in others.
    I would be interested to know how Robert Trivers ideas might apply to 
the proposed seasonal "day care" hypothesis.  Anyway, I am not proposing 
reciprocal altruism anywhere near what might be found in eusocial insects 
(ant colonies for instance), but still something a little more social than 
in bird colonies (like penguins), at least during a migratory season (if 
evidence for such migration is found).  I would certainly not expect to find 
anything like this among predatory dinosaurs (theropods), most of which were 
probably more territorial and not social, like many of their bird 
descendants.  It just seems like it would be much easier to study behaviors 
in Maiasaura (even if we don't have thousands of skeletons), compared to 
theropods (non-avian) whose remains are relatively scarce.
                   ---------Ken
*********************************************************
> From: Carl Mehling <cosm@amnh.org>
> Reply-To: cosm@amnh.org
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: RE: Seasonal "Day Care" Hypothesis for Maiasaura
> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 10:31:08 -0500
>
> "However, although most of the herd would then migrate to distant
> feeding areas, it seems reasonable to me that some small number would
> stay behind to guard the site against egg robbers (at least minimize
> the damage they might do).  The numbers of "guards" would not have to
> be very large, and couldn't be too large as to overgraze the area in
> a time of scarcity (and if necessary they could work in shifts to
> graze in areas further away).
>
> Criticism welcome,  Ken Kinman"
>
> I've been meaning to reply to this for a while - forgive me if you've
> all moved on.
>
> I would think the number of guards could be no less than half of the
> herd because animals don't tend to give a damn about individuals that
> they don't share huge amounts of genetic material with. Unless there
> was some sort of reciprocal altruism going on, only the parents of a
> clutch would bother protecting it. I could be wrong, but in most
> birds, doesn't at least one parent stay with the eggs while the other
> goes off to eat? Granted, incubation is an issue, but guarding
> against predators was also very important. I can't find my copy of
> Robert Trivers' Social Evolution to pull out any dazzlers, but I
> recommend giving it a look with regard to this thread.
>
> Carl
>
> Carl Mehling
> National Center for Science Literacy, Education and Technology
> American Museum of Natural History
> Central Park West @79th Street
> New York, N.Y.  10024
> (212) 769-5849
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com