INTRODUCTION Pages 1 - 2
...motor patterns
Pages 5 - 6
...releasing, directing stimuli
Page 7
...motivating stimuli
Pages 8 - 9
...motor patterns
Pages 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15
...releasing, directing stimuli
Page 16
...motivating stimuli
Pages 17 - 18
SUBMISSION
Page 19
...motor patterns
Page 20
...stimuli
Page 21
PATROL/ MARKING
Page 22
...motor patterns
Pages 23 - 24
...releasing, directing stimuli
Page 25
...motivating stimuli
Pages 26 - 27
INTERACTIONS Page 28
DISCUSSION
Pages 29 - 30 - 31 - 32
FIGURES 1-2
Pages 33 - 34
Two types of intraspecific aggressive behavior, offense and defense, can be distinguished in muroid rodents. Although the distinction was originally made in cats [Leyhausen, 1956], it has since been extended on the basis of a number of criteria to muroid rodents including Rattus norvegicus [Grant and Mackintosh, 1963; Adams, 1971, 1976; Lehman and Adams, 1977; Miczek, 1974; B1anchard et al, 1975a], Clethrionomys sp [Johst, 1967], and Mus musculus and Mesocricetus auratus [Grant and Mackintosh, 1963].
Although the offense and defense motivational systems differ in many important respects, it is easiest to differentiate them on the basis of their different motor patterns of attack and the orientation of locomotion. Offense involves approach locomotion and the bite-and-kick attack, in which the attacker jumps or lies across the back of the opponent and bites the opposite flank. Defense involves flight locomotion and the lunge-and-bite attack which is directed at the face or other protruding part of the opponent. In actual practice, the offensive and defensive animals may be distinguished by the patterns of wounding suffered during fighting. The defensive animal is usually wounded on the flank and rump as a result of bite-and-kick attacks by its opponent, while the offensive animal (if wounded at all) is usually bitten on the face as a result of lunge-and-bite attack by its opponent. This has been observed in Microtus agrestis [Clarke, 1956], Dicrostonyx groenlandicus [Bowen and Brooks, 1978], Mi ochrogaster [Rose and Gaines, 1976], and R norvegicus [Calhoun, 1962, p 181; Crabtree and Moyer, 1973; Blanchard et al, 1975a; Thor, 1976]. Furthermore, the offensive animal is characterized by confident approach towards its opponent or chasing if the encounter takes place in a large arena. The defensive animal is characterized by escape attempts and flight locomotion if there is an opportunity for escape, although the lunge-and-bite attack includes a limited rapid approach lunge.
 |
 |
 |