Hostname: page-component-f554764f5-sl7kg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-15T07:06:44.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Societies of the open ocean without territories

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 April 2025

Hal Whitehead Open the ORCID record for Hal Whitehead [Opens in a new window]  and
Sam F. Walmsley Open the ORCID record for Sam F. Walmsley [Opens in a new window]
Hal Whitehead*
Affiliation:
Biology Department, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada [email protected] [email protected] https://whiteheadlab.weebly.com/
Sam F. Walmsley
Affiliation:
Biology Department, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada [email protected] [email protected] https://whiteheadlab.weebly.com/
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Shared group identifications can significantly subdivide populations. However, groups with mutual recognition may not be territorial. In the deep ocean, territoriality is absent but some species have important groups based upon shared identification. Control over access to physical space should be dropped from the definition of “society,” although “territorial society” could be retained as an important subcategory.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 48 , 2025 , e74
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barrett-Lennard, L. (2011). Killer whale evolution: Populations, ecotypes, species, Oh my! Journal of the American Cetacean Society, 40(1), 48–53.Google Scholar
Cade, D. E., Fahlbusch, J. A., Oestreich, W. K., Ryan, J., Calambokidis, J., Findlay, K. P., … Goldbogen, J. A. (2021). Social exploitation of extensive, ephemeral, environmentally controlled prey patches by supergroups of rorqual whales. Animal Behaviour, 182, 251–266.Google Scholar
Ford, J. K. B., Ellis, G. M., & Balcomb, K. C. (2000). Killer whales. UBC Press.Google Scholar
Gowans, S., Würsig, B., & Karczmarski, L. (2007). The social structure and strategies of delphinids: Predictions based on an ecological framework. Advances in Marine Biology, 53, 195–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2881(07)53003-8Google Scholar
Hersh, T. A., Gero, S., Rendell, L., Cantor, M., Weilgart, L., Amano, M., … Whitehead, H. (2022). Evidence from sperm whale clans of symbolic marking in non-human cultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(37), e2201692119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inchausti, P., & Halley, J. (2002). The long-term temporal variability and spectral colour of animal populations. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 4, 1033–1048.Google Scholar
Riesch, R., Barrett-Lennard, L. G., Ellis, G. M., Ford, J. K. B., & Deecke, V. B. (2012). Cultural traditions and the evolution of reproductive isolation: Ecological speciation in killer whales? Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 106(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, C. M., & Ormond, R. F. G. (1992). Butterflyfish social behaviour, with special reference to the incidence of territoriality: A review. Environmental Biology of Fishes, 34, 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, H. (2024). Sperm whale clans and human societies. Royal Society Open Science, 11, 23153. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.231353CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitehead, H., & Rendell, L. (2015). The cultural lives of whales and dolphins. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar