Sociobiology seminars

Nicolas Mathevon examines the evolution of vocal communication through an analysis of songs from more than 3,000 passerine species. The study organizes their acoustic diversity into eight basic motifs and relates motif use to social organization, morphology, mating systems and sound transmission. Tropical forest conditions favor simpler signals such as flat whistles that travel effectively through dense habitat. In temperate regions, dense populations, short breeding seasons and stronger sexual selection favor complex signals such as rapid trills, despite their greater degradation during transmission. The resulting global pattern reflects a changing balance between environmental constraints and selection for complex communication. Online on 30 September 2026, 17:00–18:00 CEST (Europe/Paris; UTC+2), with an optional 15-minute discussion afterward. Open worldwide through Zoom. Use the join information on the organizer's page; its optional registration form subscribes attendees to seminar updates. Organized by LINGUAE's Animal Linguistics Seminar, with Emmanuel Chemla, Lucie Ravaux and Philippe Schlenker. Online via Zoom; public joining instructions on the organizer’s seminar page.

What do nonhuman primates know about each other and their social environment, how do they allocate their attention, and what are the functional consequences of social decisions in natural settings? Addressing these questions is crucial to hone in on the co-evolution of cognition, social behaviour and communication, and ultimately the evolution of intelligence in the primate order. I will present results from field experimental and observational studies on free-ranging baboons, which tap into the cognitive abilities of these animals. Baboons are particularly valuable in this context as different species reveal substantial variation in social organization and degree of despotism. Field experiments revealed considerable variation in the allocation of social attention: while the competitive chacma baboons were highly sensitive to deviations from the social order, the highly tolerant Guinea baboons revealed a confirmation bias. This bias may be a result of the high gregariousness of the species, which puts a premium on ignoring social noise. Variation in despotism clearly impacted the use of signals to regulate social interactions. For instance, male-male interactions in chacma baboons mostly comprised dominance displays, while Guinea baboon males evolved elaborate greeting rituals that serve to confirm group membership and test social bonds. Strikingly, the structure of signal repertoires does not differ substantially between different baboon species. In conclusion, the motivational disposition to engage in affiliation or aggressiveness appears to be more malleable during evolution than structural elements of the behavioral repertoire; this insight is crucial for understanding the dynamics of social evolution.

Social insects fight disease as a collective. Their colonies are protected against disease by the combination of the individual immune defenses of all colony members and their jointly performed nest- and colony-hygiene. This social immunity is achieved by cooperative behaviors to reduce pathogen load of the colony and to prevent transmission along the social interaction networks of colony members. Individual and social immunity interact: performance of sanitary care can affect future disease susceptibility, yet also vice versa, individuals differing in susceptibility adjust their sanitary care performance to their individual risk of infection. I present the integrated approach we use to understand how colony protection arises from the individual and collective actions of colony members and how it affects pathogen communities and hence disease ecology.

The western honey bee (Apis mellifera) is a domesticated pollinator famous for living in highly social colonies. In the spring, thousands of worker bees and a queen fly from their hive in search of a new home. They self-assemble into a swarm that hangs from a tree branch for several days. We reconstruct the non-isotropic arrangement of worker bees inside swarms made up of 3000 - 8000 bees using x-ray computed tomography. Some bees are stationary and hang from the attachment board or link their bodies into hanging chains to support the swarm structure. The remaining bees use the chains as pathways to walk around the swarm, potentially to feed the queen or communicate with one another. The top layers of bees bear more weight per bee than the remainder of the swarm, suggesting that bees are optimizing for additional factors besides weight distribution. Despite not having a clear leader, honey bees are able to organize into a swarm that protects the queen and remains stable until scout bees locate a new hive.

Colonies of ants and other eusocial insects are superorganisms, which perform sophisticated cognitive-like functions at the level of the group. In my talk I will review our efforts to establish the clonal raider ant Ooceraea biroi as a lab model system for the systematic study of the principles underlying collective information processing in ant colonies. I will use results from two separate projects to demonstrate the potential of this model system: In the first, we analyze the foraging behavior of the species, known as group raiding: a swift offensive response of a colony to the detection of a potential prey by a scout. By using automated behavioral tracking and detailed analysis we show that this behavior is closely related to the army ant mass raid, an iconic collective behavior in which hundreds of thousands of ants spontaneously leave the nest to go hunting, and that the evolutionary transition between the two can be explained by a change in colony size alone. In the second project, we study the emergence of a collective sensory response threshold in a colony. The sensory threshold is a fundamental computational primitive, observed across many biological systems. By carefully controlling the sensory environment and the social structure of the colonies we were able to show that it also appear in a collective context, and that it emerges out of a balance between excitatory and inhibitory interactions between ants. Furthermore, by using a mathematical model we predict that these two interactions can be mapped into known mechanisms of communication in ants. Finally, I will discuss the opportunities for understanding collective behavior that are opening up by the development of methods for neuroimaging and neurocontrol of our ants.

Dr. Sean O'Donnell is a Professor of Biodiversity Earth & Environmental Science at Drexel University, USA. His neuroscience research focuses on how brain structure plasticity & evolution are affected by social behavior, mainly using insects as models. He is also interested in tropical ecology & thermal physiology. He conducts field research & teaches field courses in Central & South America, as well as in the Negev Desert in Israel.

If only those behaviours evolve that increase the actor’s own survival and reproductive success, then it might come as a surprise that cooperative behaviours, i.e. providing benefits to others, are a widespread phenomenon. Many animals cooperate even with unrelated individuals in various contexts, like providing care or food. One possibility to explain these behaviours is reciprocity. Reciprocal cooperation, i.e. helping those that were helpful before, is a ubiquitous and important trait of human sociality. Still, the evolutionary origin of it is largely unclear, mainly because it is believed that other animals do not exchange help reciprocally. Consequently, reciprocity is suggested to have evolved in the human lineage only. In contrast to this, I propose that reciprocity is not necessarily cognitively demanding and likely to be widespread. In my talk, I will first shed light on the mechanisms of reciprocal cooperation in Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus). In a series of studies, my colleagues and I have demonstrated that Norway rats reciprocally exchange goods and services between and within different commodities and independent of kinship. Furthermore, to understand the evolutionary origins of human reciprocity, and whether it is shared with other animals, I will then discuss evidence for reciprocity in non-human primates, which are our closest living relatives. A thorough analysis of the findings showed that reciprocity is present and, for example, not confined to unrelated individuals, but that the choice of commodities can impact the likelihood of reciprocation. Based on my findings, I conclude that reciprocal cooperation in non-human animals is present but largely neglected and not restricted to humans. In order to deepen our understanding of the evolutionary origins of reciprocity in more general, future studies should investigate when and how reciprocity in non-human animals emerged and how it is maintained.

According to Hamilton’s inclusive fitness hypothesis, kinship is an organizing principle of social behavior. Behavioral evidence supporting this hypothesis includes the ability to recognize kin and the adjustment of behavior based on kin preference with respect to altruism, attachment and care for offspring in insect societies. Despite the fundamental importance of kinship behavior, the underlying neural mechanisms are poorly understood. We repeated behavioral experiments by Hepper on behavioral preference of rats for their kin. Consistent with Hepper’s work, we find a developmental time course for kinship behavior, where rats prefer sibling interactions at young ages and express non-sibling preferences at older ages. In probing the brain areas responsible for this behavior, we find that aspiration lesions of the lateral septum but not control lesions of cingulate cortices eliminate the behavioral preference in young animals for their siblings and in older rats for non-siblings. We then presented awake and anaesthetized rats with odors and calls of age- and status-matched kin (siblings and mothers) and non-kin (non-siblings and non-mothers) conspecifics, while performing in vivo juxta-cellular and whole-cell patch-clamp recordings in the lateral septum. We find multisensory (olfactory and auditory) neuronal responses, whereby neurons typically responded preferentially but not exclusively to individual social stimuli. Non-kin-odor responsive neurons were found dorsally, while kin-odor responsive neurons were located in ventrally in the lateral septum. To our knowledge such an ordered representation of response preferences according to kinship has not been previously observed and we refer this organization as nepotopy. Nepotopy could be instrumental in reading out kinship from preferential but not exclusive responses and in the generation of differential behavior according to kinship. Thus, our results are consistent with a role of the lateral septum in organizing mammalian kinship behavior.

Social interactions are central to the human experience, yet it is also one of the faculty of the brain that is the most impaired by mental illness. Similarly, social interactions are essential for animals to survive, reproduce, and raise their young. Over the years, my lab has attempted to decipher the unique characteristics of social recognition: what are the unique cues that trigger distinct social behaviors, what is the nature and identity of social behavior circuits, how is the function of these circuits different in males and females and how are they modulated by the animal physiological status? In this lecture, I will describe our recent progress in using genetic, imaging, molecular and behavioral approaches to understand how the brain controls specific social behaviors in both males and females, and how areas throughout the brain participate in the positive and negative controls of specific social interactions. I will also describe how new approaches of single cell transcriptomics have enabled us to uncover specific cell populations involved in distinct social behaviors and the basis of their activity modulation according to the animal state.

Collective behaviour operates without central control, through interactions among individuals. The collective behaviour of ant colonies is based on simple olfactory interactions. Ant species differ enormously in the algorithms that regulate collective behaviour, reflecting diversity in ecology. I will contrast two species in very different ecological situations. Harvester ant colonies in the desert, where water is scarce but conditions are stable, regulate foraging to conserve water. Response to positive feedback from olfactory interactions depends on the risk of water loss, mediated by dopamine neurophysiology. For arboreal turtle ants in the tropical forest, life is easy but unpredictable, and a highly modular system uses negative feedback to sustain activity. In all natural systems, from ant colonies to brains, collective behaviour evolves in relation with changing conditions. Similar dynamics in environmental conditions may lead to the evolution of similar processes to regulate collective behaviour.