Abstract
Spatial structure underpins numerous population processes by determining the environment individuals' experience and which other individuals they encounter. Yet, how the social landscape influences individuals' spatial decisions remains largely unexplored. Wild great tits (Parus major) form freely moving winter flocks, but choose a single location to establish a breeding territory over the spring. We demonstrate that individuals' winter social associations carry‐over into their subsequent spatial decisions, as individuals breed nearer to those they were most associated with during winter. Further, they also form territory boundaries with their closest winter associates, irrespective of breeding distance. These findings were consistent across years, and among all demographic classes, suggesting that such social carry‐over effects may be general. Thus, prior social structure can shape the spatial proximity, and fine‐scale arrangement, of breeding individuals. In this way, social networks can influence a wide range of processes linked to individuals' breeding locations, including other social interactions themselves.
Highlights
The spatial structure within populations is an important aspect of many biological processes (Tilman & Kareiva 1997; Lion & van Baalen 2008)
Winter social networks carry-over into breeding spatial proximity Individuals generally bred closer to birds they had held stronger social associations with during the previous winter (Fig. 1a; Fig. S3)
By carrying out permutations which re-assigned individuals’ social network positions within their winter spatial locations, we found that winter spatial structuring contributed to the correlation between winter social networks and subsequent breeding proximity (Mantel r 0.44–0.52; Fig. 1b)
Summary
The spatial structure within populations is an important aspect of many biological processes (Tilman & Kareiva 1997; Lion & van Baalen 2008). The heritability of phenotypic traits, and responses to selection, can vary over small scales (Garant et al 2005), and spatial structure can have consequences for adaptation over time. An individual’s spatial position determines which other individuals it encounters, thereby influencing its social environment (Crook 1970). Where individuals are spatially located shapes processes dependent on social interactions, such as cooperation (Nowak & May 1992; Lion & van Baalen 2008) and mating (Emlen & Oring 1977). Individuals inhabiting areas where they encounter conspecifics more often may experience a higher intensity of sexual selection (Taff et al 2013), and males may increase their reproductive success if their local competitors are systematically less-competitive individuals (Oh & Badyaev 2010; Farine & Sheldon 2015)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
