Talk:Agonistic behaviour

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Animals Mid‑importance

Agonistic behaviour is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2018 and 28 November 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rseward13.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of agonistic behaviour

I am not entirely sure I would agree with the first line of this article. 'Agonistic' generally means 'competitive', as in a pair of agonistic muscles. I have always believed that agonistic behaviour is competitive behaviour rather than behaviour related solely to fighting or to aggression. Animals can be competitive without fighting or aggression (as the article points out later). There are plenty of examples such as animals pushing and shoving for food, or threats without contact. I suggest the word 'fighting' in the first line should be replaced with 'competing'. DrChrissy (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article specifically addresses agonism in ethology, where it specifically refers to fighting-related behaviors. Encyclopedia Britannica defines "agonism" in the animal behavior sense as "survivalist animal behaviour that includes aggression, defense, and avoidance". Not all competitive behaviors fall under this definition. (Competition, in biology, merely means any kind of struggle for contested resources, which is a broader topic.) 138.16.160.4 (talk) 20:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having worked in ethology for over 20 years, I doubt many ethologists would agree with the rather narrow definition you cite. It seems to me that this definition means much valuable information on animal behaviour will not be available to the reader within this article. DrChrissy (talk) 16:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have just read the article again and he first 2 sentences are In ethology, agonistic behaviour is any social behaviour related to fighting. Thus it is broader than aggressive behaviour because it includes not only actual aggression but also threats, displays, retreats, placating aggressors, and conciliation. 'Avoidance' as given in the Encyclopedia Britannica definition cited above is included, but how can we know that an animal moving in one direction is actively avoiding fighting another and therefore whether this is 'agonistic behaviour' or 'competitive behaviour'.DrChrissy (talk) 16:54, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is noteworthy that the Encyclopedia Britannica article cited above by 138.16.160.4 does NOT contain the word 'fighting'. DrChrissy (talk) 17:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the unusual definition given in the first sentence, this leads to illogical text such as section 5 'Agonistic fighting'...what then is 'non-agonistic' fighting? __DrChrissy (talk) 15:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of section on Winner Effect

I have accessed the source of information given by the editor who included the paragraphs on the Winner Effect. The source is a scientific paper on a study using sunfish, not mice as indicated in the WP article. This has probably been a good faith mistake, but I have deleted the section until the correct reference is given because until then, the edit is unverifiable.__DrChrissy (talk) 19:32, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]