Andelt [1985]
Coyote
Ca
Not given
48
a + s
< 100 m apart
Average distance apart and travelled together; simple ratio
Table: assoc, coeff. by age/ sex class: line graph: by age/sex class & season [simple ratio]
Compare six reproductive stages
Arcese et al. [1995]
Oribi
Un
Not given
236
a + s
In the same group [= within 100 m of another group member]
No. of dyadic associations
Line graph: % dyads intact over 5 years
Compare dyads intact in each study year
Arnold et al. [1981]
Dorset Horn sheep
Un
13 [captive]
13
a + s
In the same grid square [400 m2 when grazing, 50 m2 when camped]
Simple ratio
Single linkage cluster analysis
Compare age classes of individuals
Arnold et al. [1981]
Southdown sheep
Un
35 [captive]
35
a + s
In the same grid square [400 m2 when grazing, 50 m2 when camped]
Simple ratio
Principal coordinates analysis
Compare age classes of individuals
Balance [1990]
Bottlenose dolphin
Ce
~ 155
155
m/c prs. excl.
In the same group [= sighted together repeatedly]; surfacing together
Twice-weight
Average linkage cluster analysis
Discuss fluidity of surfacing associations
Behrends et al. [1986]
Merriam’s kangaroo
Ro
Not given
60
s
Home ranges overlap
% range overlap
Table: mean assoc, coeff. by sex class
Compare three study periods
Bell and Ford [1986]
Striated thornbill
Bi
≥ 44
44
s
Seen together
% of joint occurrences
Cluster analysis
Discuss variation of group size with season
Bigg et al., [1990]
Killer whale
Ce
261 [in 1987]
All
a + s
Photographed together
Cole’s index
Average single-link cluster analysis
Compare mother– offspring bonds in 4-year groups
Braeger et al. [1994]
Bottlenose dolphin
Ce
Not given
1000
No
Members of the same group [= observed in apparent association]
Half-weight
Histogram of classes of association coefficients
Compare association coefficient for 2 years
Byrne et al. [1989]
Drakensberg mountain baboon
Pr
Not given
26 [this study]
a + s
Participants in grooming or approach/retreat interactions; nearest neighbors
Counts of grooming, nearest neighbor and approach/ retreat interactions
Average link cluster analysis; sociogram; matrix only [approach/ retreat]
Discuss variation with season
Cantoni and Vogel [1989]
Greater whitetoothed shrew
In
Not given
26
s
Within 1 m of one another; in the same nest; home ranges overlap
Simple ratio; proportion of home range overlap
Sociogram; map of home ranges
Compare winter with breeding season
Chapman [1990]
Spider monkey
Pr
42 [within study area]
35
a + s
In the same subgroup [= coordinated activities, close spatial contact]
Twice-weight
Cluster analysis
Discuss sociability in re: to food availability
Chepko-Sade et al. [1989]
Rhesus monkey
Pr
Not given
126
a + s
Participants in grooming interaction
Counts of being groomed & grooming; prop, of total group grooming
Cluster analysis: sociogram
Not considered
Clarke and FitzGerald [1994]
Bell miner
Bi
9 to 58 [on study site]
all
a + s
Ranges overlap
Proportion of foraging range overlap
Map of range overlap
Not considered
Corradino [1990]
Japanese macaque
Pr
14 [captive]
14
a + s
Within 1.5 m of each other
Half-weight
Nonmetric multidimensional scaling
Compare breeding and nonbreeding seasons
Deng and Zhao [1987]
Stump-tailed macaque
Pr
Not given
29
a + s
Within 5 m: participants in affiliative or agonistic interaction
Half-weight; counts of agonistic interactions
Single-link cluster analysis: matrix only [agonistic interactions]
Compare sociability of different age classes
Digby [1995]
Common marmoset
Pr
Not given
33 [this study]
a + s
Participants in dominant/subordinate or grooming interaction; nearest neighbor [< 2 m]
Proportion of nearest neighbor & grooming interactions; counts of dominant/subordinate interactions
Sociogram; matrix only [dominant/subordinant interactions]
Discuss changes in sociability prior to emigration
Eckman [1979]
Willow tit
Bi
21 [on study site]
20
a + s
In the same group [= foraging close together]
Twice-weight
Histogram of obs. and exp. prop, of joint occurrences
Not considered
Eckman [1979]
Crested tit
Bi
13 [on study site]
12
a + s
In the same group [= foraging close together]
Twice-weight
Histogram of obs. and exp. prop, of joint occurrences
Not considered
Festa- Bianchet [1991]
Bighorn sheep
Un
Not given
360
a + s
In the same group [group not defined]
Counts of joint occurrences
Table: ratio of obs. to exp. joint occurrences by age/ sex class
Compare ewe–offspring association by age of offspring
Ficken et al [1981].
Black capped chickadee
Bi
Not given
Most
s
Nearest associate [< 3 m]: arrive] feeder within 1 min of each other:] feeder area within the same hour: participants in agressive encounter
Half-weight: counts of outcomes of agonistic interactions
Matrices only
Compare early and late prebreeding seasons
Frank [1986a b]
Spotted hyaena
Ca
~ 3000
60–80 [this study]
a + s
Present within the clan [= all study animals]: participants in agonistic interaction
Occurrence within the clan: counts of outcomes of agonistic interactions
Sighting history diagram. matrix only [agonistic interactions]
Compare clan membership for 4 years
Ginsberg [1989]
Grevy's Zebra
Un
Not given
1084
s
In the same group [group not defined]
Rate of group turnover
Line graph of % group remaining by study day
Graph % group remaining by day
Goodall [1986]
Chimpanzee
Pr
~ 160
all
a + s
In the same party [= travel. feed and sleep together]
Twice-weight
Sociogram
Present raw data matrices by day for different years
Greenberg- Cohen et al. [1994]
Nubian ibex
Un
~ 300
45
a + s
Participants in agonistic interaction
Counts of outcomes of agonistic interactions
Matrix only
Compare hourly rate of interaction through day
Herrera and Macdonald [1987]
Capybara
Ro
Not given
Not given
a + s
In the same group [= frequently present & generally tolerated]
Occurrence within group
Sighting history diagram
Compare group membership in two years
Hillman [1987]
Common eland
Un
Not given
~ 180
a + s
In the same group [= within 50 m & moving in same direction or behaving similarily]
Cole's index
Table: frequency of classes of assoc. coeff. by age/sex class; sighting history diagram
Compare duration of association by age class
Hirotani [1990]
Reindeer
Un
~ 130
All
a + s
In the same group [= apart from other aggregations; coordinating activities]
Twice-weight
Bar chart: mean assoc. coeff. between moms and diff. aged daughters by season
Compare nonrutting I & II and calving seasons
Johnson [1989]
Red-necked wallaby
Ma
98 adults [within study area]
98
a + s
In the same group [= a gathering in one place; within 30 m of one another]
Half-weight
Line graph: mean assoc. coeff. by age/sex class vs companion rank
Compare ♀ sociability in different reproductive stages
Kappeler [1993]
Ringtailed lemur
Pr
10 [captive]
10
a + s
Nearest neighbor: participants in affiliative or agonistic interaction
Proportion of nearest neighbor occurrences; counts of affiliative and agonistic interactions
Table: obs. & exp. nearest neighbor scores by sex class: matrices only [affinitive & agonistic interactions]
Not considered
Kappeler [1993]
Redfronted lemur
Pr
8 [captive]
8
a + s
Nearest neighbor: participants in affiliative or agonistic interaction
Proportion of nearest neighbor occurrences; counts of affiliative and agonistic interactions
Table: obs. & exp. nearest neighbor scores by sex class: matrices only [affinitive & agonistic interactions]
Not considered
Kappeler [1993]
Crowned lemur
Pr
4 [captive]
4
a + s
Nearest neighbor; participants in affiliative or agonistic interaction
Proportion of nearest neighbor occurrences; counts of affiliative and agonistic interactions
Table: obs. & exp. nearest neighbor scores by sex class; matrices only [affinitive & agonistic interactions]
Not considered
Karlsson [1988]
Bank vole
Ro
Not given
23
s
Home ranges overlap
Proportion of home range overlap
Table: obs. & exp. assoc, coeff.; map of home ranges
Compare home ranges in different months
Knight [1970]
Elk
Un
2000–3000
209
a + s
Observed together
Half-weight
Table: frequency of classes of assoc, coeff.
Compare mean coefficients in different seasons
Koenig and Rothe [1991]
Common
marmoset
Pr
8 [captive]
8
a + s
In proximity [< 1 m]
Counts of intervals in proximity
SSociogram
Compare before & after birth of infants
Kozhurina [1993]
Noctule bat
Ch
27 [captive]
27
a + s
At the same roost site
Dimensionless information index
Nonmetric multidimensional scaling
Not considered
Lawrence and Wood-Gush [1988]
Scottish blackface sheep
Un
Not given
62
a + s
Used the same grid areas
Euclidian distance
Ward’s error sum of squares cluster analysis
Compare four seasons
Lawrence [1990]
Scottish hill sheep
Un
Not given
12 ewe- daughter pairs [this study]
a + s
In the same group [= within 30 m of another member]
Proportion of joint occurrences
Cluster analysis; line graph: median ewe-lamb assoc, coefficient by season
Compare associations by seasons
Lazo [1994]
Feral cattle
Un
≤ 140 [> 1 year old] at any one time
All
a + s
In the same group [= cohesive behavior & spatial distribution]
Social affinity index; proportion of home range overlap
Average linkage cluster analysis
Compare home range overlap for four seasons
Le Pendu et at. [1995]
Mouflon
Un
~ 127
62
a + s
In the same group [= within 80 m of nearest neighbor]
Square-root; relative mother–offspring affinities
Correspondence factorial analysis
Calculate proportion of associates remaining by day
Leuthold [1979]
Giraffe
Un
Not given
Not given
a + s
In the same group [= within 500 m & not moving in different directions]
Half-weight; occurr home range overlap ence of
Histogram: assoc, coeff. by age/sex class; map of home ranges
Compare association coefficients by age class
Lott and Minta [1983]
American bison
Un
400
16 cows & 8 calves study]
a + s
In the same group [= within 90 m of another group member]
Square-root; distance coefficient
Average linkage cluster analysis
Compare pre- and post- cow–calf separation
Marinelli and Messier [1993]
Muskrat
Ro
Not given
18 radio- tagged
s
Home ranges overlap
% home range overlap
Map of home ranges
Calculate % overlap for 5 months
Matthysen et al. [1992]
Red-breasted nuthatch
Bi
~ 33 [on study site]
21
s
Within 50 m of each other: home ranges overlap
Twice-weight: proportion home range of overlap
Matrix only; map of home ranges
Not considered
McWilliam[1988]
Free-tailed bat
Ch
~ 107
107
a + s
Caught at the same roost
Occurrences at same roost
Sighting history diagram
Compare roost composition in two years
Mitani [1986]
Japanese macaque
Pr
28 [study pop. = 1 troop]
12 [this study]
a + s
In proximity [< 20 m]; participants in vocal exchange or grooming interaction
Reciprocal value of proximity frequency; counts of vocal exchange and allogr ooming
Average linkage cluster analysis; sociogram
Not considered
Mobley and Herman [1985]
Humpback whale
Ce
Not given
32 [this study]
Calf not[
In the same group [= within a few body lengths & engaged in synchronous activity or interacting closely]
Rate of membership change per pod per hour
Line graph of biweekly rate of change over study period
Discuss affiliations and disaffiliations observed during study
Morland [1991]
Ruffed lemur
Pr
26 [study communities]pop. = 2
11
a + s
Participants in affiliative interaction
Proportion of affiliative interaction
Sociogram
Compare warm and cool seasons
Moss and Poole [1983]
African elephant
Pb
615
615
a + s
Sighted together
Simple ratio
Sociogram
Discuss changes in relation to ecological factors
Murray [1981]
Impala
Un
Not given
443
a + s
In the same group [group not defined]
Half-weight
Maximum spanning tree
Plot mean assoc, coeff. by age class
Myers [1983]
Sanderling
Bi
80–400
~ 25%
no
In the same flock [flock not defined]
Twice-weight
Histogram of observed and expected coherence distributions
Graph probability of remaining associated vs time [days] for three seasons
Nakagawa [1992]
Patas monkey
Pr
Not given
8 [this study]
a + s
In proximity [3 m]; exchange contact calls: participants in grooming: rest in the me tree] night
Half-weight [proximity. calling & allogrooming]: proportion of night coresting
Sociogram
Compare individuals of different age classes
Newberry and Wood- Gush [1986]
Domestic pig
Un
Not given [captive]
26 [this study]
a + s
Resting together; performing coincident behaviors; participants in butting or sniffing interactions; nearest neighbors
Half-weight; coincident behaviors; nearest neighbor occurrences and butting & sniffing interactions
Single link cluster analysis; sociograms
Compare associations at different ages of piglets
Norris et al. [1994]
Hawaiian Spinner dolphin
Ce
~ 1000
36 [this study]
No
In the same school
Simple ratio [calculated for 1 pair]
Sighting history diagram
Discuss changes in observed associations
Pages- Feuillade [1988]
Grey lesser mouse lemur
Pr
Not given
9
a + s
Within 10 m of one another; home ranges overlap
Half-weight; % home range overlap; prop, of joint occurrences
Sociogram; map of home ranges; matrix only [joint occurrences]
Discuss varying sociability with ♀ estrus state
Palomares and Delibes [1993]
Egyptian mongoose
Ca
Not given
24
a + s
In the same resting site; < 10 m apart
Simple ratio; home range overlap
Sociogram; map of home ranges
Compare home range overlap for 2 years
Parker et al. [1995]
Black vulture
Bi
Not given
17 [this study]
a
At the same roost
Simple ratio
Matrix only
Not considered
Penzhorn [1984]
Cape mountain
Un
117–148
All
a + s
In the same group [= bachelor group of ♂ < 5 but >
Half-weight
Principal components analysis
Compare associations in 103-month periods
Poole [1995]
Lynx
Ca
Not given
51
a + s
Home ranges overlap;
Sc???? O
Coefficient of sociality [Sc]; % home range overlap
Table: assoc, coefficients; map of home ranges
Compare home range overlap in different years
Rayor [1988]
Gunnison’s prairie dog
Ro
2 sites: 1000–1500; 125
Not given
a + s
Home ranges overlap; participants in agonistic or amicable interaction
% home range & space use overlap: counts of agonistic & amicable interactions
Table: association coefficient by age/sex class
Not considered
Reinhardt and Reinhardt [1981]
Zebu cattle
Un
47–108 [captive]
29 ♀’s[this study]
a + s
Participants in social grazing or social licking
Simple ratio; % social licking occurrences
Sociogram
Compare different years of study
Rood [1989]
Slender mongoose
Ca
6 adults + young on study site
6
a + s
Sighted in proximity
Counts of joint occurrences
Matrix only
Not considered
Rowell [1993]and Rowell
Feral sheep
Un
40–60
All
a + s
Present in the same group [group not defined] in all 3 seasons
Occurrence in same group in 3 seasons
None
Compare group membership in 3 years
Schaller [1972]
Lion
Ca
2000–2400
216
a + s
Seen together: participants in head rubbing or social licking
Half-weight; occurrences of social licking and head rubbing
Matrices only
Compare association coefficient for 2 years
Schilder [1992]
Mixed group of Grant and Chapman plains zebras
Un
23–29 [captive]
All
a + s
Within 8 m of one another: participants in affiliative interaction
Simple ratio; occurrence of affiliative interactions
Sociogram
Compare pre- & postharem takeover periodss
Shane and McSweeney [1990]
Short-finned pilot whale
Ce
Not given
Not given
a + s
In the same pod [pod not defined]
Half-weight
Sighting history diagram
Not considered
Shapiro [1986]
Coral reef fish
Fi
Not given
66
a + s
Together at one of three positions
Simple ratio
Matrix only
Measure changes in rate of movement between subgroups after experimental manipulation
Slooten et al. [1993].
Hector’s dolphin
Ce
3000–4000
79
s
In the same group [group not defined] or cluster of groups [≤ 200 m]
Half-weight; simple ratio; standardized reassociation rate
Average linkage cluster analysis; rate plotted against time intervals
Plot reassociation rate as a function of time
Smith and Van Buskirk [1988]
Black-capped chickadees
Bi
Not given
114
a + s
In the same foraging group [= foraging together & separated from others]
Half-weight
Average linkage cluster analysis
Discuss frequent changes in group memberships
Smolker et al [1992]
Bottlenose dolphin
Ce
Not given
56 [this stud y]
a + s
Sighted in the same party [= within 10m of another member]
Half-weight
Sociogram and multi dimensional scaling
Present a sociogram for each of 5 years
Somers et al [1995]
Warthog
Un
Not given
47
a + s
Participants in one of 8 types of interactions
Rates per hour of eight types of interaction
Matrix only
Discuss variation with season
Sugiyama [1988]
Chimpanzee
Pr
17–22
all
a + s
Participants in grooming interaction: in proximity [< 1 s m]
Counts of allogrooming and proximity interactions
Matrix only
Compare 2 study periods
Sullivan [1990]
Red junglefowl
Bi
35–50
27 [this study]
s
seen together
Half-weight
Average link cluster analysis
Compare ♀ associations with & without chicks
Sun and Dai [1995]
Chinese water deer
Un
Not given
23
a + s
Within 20 m of one another and coordinating behavior
Twice-weight
Matrix of mean association coefficients by sex class
Discuss variations in association with mating phase
Tilson et al. [1988]
Przewalski horse
Un
8 [captive]
8
a + s
Within 1 body length of one another; participants in agonistic interactions
Simple ratio; counts of agonistic interactions
Histogram of observed associations; matrix only [agonistic interactions]
Discuss uncertainty in longevity of association
Ueda [1986]
Fan-tailed warbler
Bi
Not given
786
s
Mate with one another
Counts of breeding attempts
Sighting history diagram
Compare 4 breeding seasons
Underwood[1981]
Common eland
Un
70– 80
all > 18 mo.
a + s
Sighted together
Half-weight
Maximum spanning tree
Plot prop, of companions remaining by day
Waser and Waser[1985]
White-tailed mongoose
Ca
Not given
24
a + s
Within 100 m of each other
Counts of joint occurrences
Matrix only
Not considered
Waterman[1995]
Cape ground Ro squirrel
Ro
68–79 in study site
All
a + s
Participants in one of 11 types of interactions
% of 11 diff. types of interactions
Bar chart; mean assoc, coeff. by sex class
Not considered
Weinrich[1991]
Humpback whale
Ce
not given
57 [this study]
a + s
Within 2 body lengths and behaving in a consistently coordinated manner
Twice-weight
Histogram: association coefficients
Discuss splitting and rejoining observed during study
Wells et al. [1987]
Bottlenose dolphin
Ce
~ 100
77 [this study]
a + s
Sighted together
Half-weight
Matrix of association coefficient by age/sex class
Compare association coefficients by age class
White and Burgman [1990]
Pygmy chimpanzee
Pr
Not given
42
s
In the same party [party not defined]; nearest neighbor [< 5 m]
Twice-weight; proportion of nearest neighbor occurrences
Average linkage cluster analysis: principal coordinates analysis
Suggest party sighting data temporally autocorrelated
Whitehead et al. [1991]
Sperm whale
Ce
~ 3500
1295
No
Photographed within 2 h of one another
Standardized reassociation rale
Rate plotted against time intervals
Graph probability of remaining associated vs time [days]
Wilkinson [1985]
Common vampire bat
Ch
Not given
205 + 319 [two sites]
a + s
Roosting in the same tree
Half-weight
Matrix of obs arid exp. assoc, coefficients
Not considered
Williams [1986]
Short-tailed leaf-nosed bat
Ch
Not given
Not given
a + s
Roosting at the same site
Proportion of joint occurrences
None
Not considered
Wursig [1978]
Bottlenose dolphin
Ce
Not given
53
m/c prs noted
Surfaced within 3 sec of one another
Occurrence of joint surfacings
Table: observed associates; sighting history diagram
Compare surfacing association on two days
Yanagisawa [1993]
Cichlid fish
Fi
Not given
33
a + s
Forage together [< 50 cm]; home ranges overlap; participant in agonistic encounter
% of total observation time in association; counts of home range overlap; rate of agonistic encounters
Map of home ranges; table: rate per hour of agonistic interactions by sex class
Not considered
Yeager [1990]
Proboscis monkey
Pr
Not given
Not given
a + s
Nearest neighbor
Square-root
Cluster analysis
Not considered
How is accessing memory in dvds different from video tapes
An optical disk drive uses a laser beam to read the data from the disk as it is spinning. It distinguishes between the pits and lands based on how the light reflects off the recording material. The drive uses the differences in reflectivity to determine the 0 and 1 bits that represent the data.
DVD-RAM is a portable, removable and rewritable optical disc format. Unlike the standard DVD medium, DVD-RAM can be written, erased and/or overwritten [with a maximum overwrite capacity of 100,000].
How is data stored on a tape? Optical storage media, such as CDs, DVDs, and Blu-ray discs, store bits by using an optical laser to burn pits into the surface of a highly reflective disc. A pit in a specified location represents a 0, and the lack of a pit represents a 1.
In some video recorders DVD-RAM can be written to and read at the same time, allowing one program to be recorded and a different one, or an earlier part of the same one [time slip recording], to be viewed at the same time.