Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41035189›Full record

ArticleEcology letters2025

Fission-Fusion Group Dynamics and Cooperative Hunting Stabilise Social Carnivore Populations.

J M Fryxell, S Mduma, J Masoy, J Grant C Hopcraft, A R E Sinclair, R Dejeante, C Packer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Diets, dominance hierarchies, and kleptoparasitism drive asymmetrical interactions between wolves and cougars.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

J M FryxellDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5278-8747
S MdumaTanzania Wildlife Research Institute, Arusha, Tanzania.
J MasoyTanzania Wildlife Research Institute, Arusha, Tanzania.
J Grant C HopcraftUniversity of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
A R E SinclairUniversity of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
R DejeanteDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
C PackerUniversity of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3939-8162

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2023-04037
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theory suggests that large social groups of carnivores should be unsustainable, due to reduced foraging efficiency because of overlapping perception radii. Using Serengeti lions as a case study, we apply behaviourally based foraging models to show that fragmentation of social groups into smaller subgroups or mutual cooperation during hunting are both plausible hypothetical mechanisms capable of sustaining larger lion prides. Data from the Serengeti ecosystem demonstrate that lion prides typically fragment into small hunting groups that are well approximated by an exponential distribution of group sizes typical of fission-fusion social systems. A model linking fission-fusion group dynamics with predator-prey interaction predicts both the surprising degree of population stability of the Serengeti lions as well as the long-term persistence of large prides. There is little evidence, however, that Serengeti lions cooperate during hunting except when they hunt Cape buffalo, so fission-fusion is apparently the dominant stabilising process in Serengeti.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorLionsPredatory BehaviorSocial BehaviorAnimalsGroup DynamicsModels, BiologicalPopulation Dynamics

Identifiers

PMID41035189
PMCPMC12489278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.