Indian Journal of Animal Research

  • Chief EditorK.M.L. Pathak

  • Print ISSN 0367-6722

  • Online ISSN 0976-0555

  • NAAS Rating 6.50

  • SJR 0.263

  • Impact Factor 0.5 (2023)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Scopus, AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus

​In the Absence of Sexual Competition, Rams with Low Social Ranks Show more Appetitive Sexual Behaviors than Males with High Ranks

Jessica María Flores-Salas, Jesús Mendoza-Carreola, Ramón Delgado-González, Alan Sebastián Alvarado-Espino, Oscar Ángel-García, Viridiana Contreras-Villarreal, Francisco Gerardo Véliz-Deras
Background: Usually, social order is defined by the animals´ size, live weight, or age. This study evaluated the effect of social rank and morphometric characteristics upon appetitive and consummatory sexual behaviors in Dorper rams in absence of sexual competition. 
Methods: The research took place in northern Mexico (26°N), 36 rams allocated into two groups were used: Low social rank (LR; n = 17) and high social rank (HR; n = 19). Behavior tests were performed for all the males, for which each one was placed in contact with a female in estrus. 
Result: There were no differences between ranks and morphometric characteristics (P<0.05). A correlation of 29% was found for the success index concerning odor in HR. Likewise, a relationship existed between the presence of horns (Pho) and all the other variables, but not between PHo vs success index (rho 0.07). Appetitive sexual behavior was the highest (P<0.05) for LR, while HR had more consummatory sexual behaviors (P<0.05). We conclude that sexual hierarchy exists even when the males have the same morphometric characteristics, nonetheless, males with low social ranks show more appetitive sexual behaviors while those with high ranks show a higher number of consummatory sexual behaviors when managed in intensive farming conditions.

  1. Álvarez, L., Martin, G.B., Galindo, F., Zarco, L.A. (2003). Social dominance of female goats affects their response to the male effect. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 84: 119-126. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2003.08.003.

  2. Barroso, F.G. Alados, C.L., Boza, J. (2000). Social hierarchy in the domestic goat: Effect on food habits and production. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 69: 35-53. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00113-1.

  3. Calderón, L.G., Meza, H.C., Rodriguez, M.R., Angel, G.O., Rivas, M.R., Delgado, B.J. and Véliz Deras, F. (2018). Influence of sexual behavior of Dorper rams treated with glutamate and/or testosterone on reproductive performance of ano vulatory ewes. Theriogenology. 106: 79-86. doi:10.1016/ j.theriogenology.2017.10.016.

  4. Cohen-Tannoudji, J., Einhorn, J. and Signoret, J.P. (1994). Ram sexual pheromone: First approach of chemical identification. Physiology and Behavior. 56(5): 955-961. doi.org/10. 1016/0031-9384(94): 90329-8.

  5. Díaz, A., Orihuela, A., Aguirre, V., Clemente, N., Pedernera, M., Flores-Pérez, I., Vázquez, R. and Ungerfeld, R. (2021). Ewes prefer subordinate rather than dominant rams as sexual partners. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 238(March). doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105306.

  6. FASS. (2010). Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching. 3rd ed. Federation Animal Science Society: Champaing. IL, USA, p. 177.

  7. Flota-Bañuelos, C., Rivera-Lorca, J.A. and Candelaria-Martínez, B. (2019). Importancia de la jerarquía social sobre los comportamientos alimenticios y parasitarios de ovinos criados en dos sistemas pastoriles. Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Pecuarias. 10(1): 52-67.

  8. Fournier, F. and Festa-Bianchet, M. (1995). Social dominance in adult female mountain goats. Animal Behaviour. 49(6): 1449-1459. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(95)90066-7.

  9. Hass, C.C. and Jenni, D.A. (1991). Structure and ontogeny of dominance relationships among bighorn rams. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 69(2): 471-476. doi.org/10.1139/z91-073.

  10. Hogg, J.T. and Forbes, S.H. (1997). Mating in bighorn sheep: Fre quent male reproduction via a high-risk unconventional tactic. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 41(1): 33-48.

  11. Inifap Laguna. (2019). Estación meteorológica Matamoros Coahuila. http://clima.inifap.gob.mx/lnm ysr/Estaciones/Consulta Diarios 15Min?Estado=5 and Estacion=26812.

  12. Larrieu, T. and Sandi, C. (2018). Stress induced depression: Is social rank a predictive risk factor?. Bio Essays. 40(7): 1800012.

  13. Lindsay, D.R., Dunsmore, D.G., Williams, J.D. and Syme, G.J. (1976). Audience effect on the mating behaviour of rams. Animal Behaviour. 24: 818-821.

  14. Maksimovic, N., Žujovic, M., Hristov, S., Petrovic, M.P., Stankovic, B., Tomic, Z. and Stanišic, N. (2012). Association between the social rank, body mass, testicular circumference and linear body measures of rams. Biotechnology in Animal Husbandry. 28(2): 253-261. doi.10.2298/BAH1202253 M. 

  15. Martin, A.M., Presseault-Gauvin, H., Festa-Bianchet, M. and Pelletier, F. (2013). Male mating competitiveness and age-dependent relationship between testosterone and social rank in bighorn sheep. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 67(6): 919-928.

  16. NAM. (2010). Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, 1st ed. National Academy of Medicine: Harlan, Mexico City, Mexico. 

  17. Orihuela, T.A. (2014). La conducta sexual del carnero. Revisioin Ram´s sexual behavior: Review. Revista Mexicana De Ciencias Pecuarias. 5(1): 49-89. 

  18. Pelletier, F. and Festa-Bianchet, M. (2006). Sexual selection and social rank in bighorn rams. Animal Behaviour. 71(3): 649-655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.07.008.

  19. Tejada, L.M., Meza, C.A., Rivas, R., Rodríguez, R., Carrillo, E., Mellado, M. and Véliz, F.G. (2016). Appetitive and con summatory sexual behaviors of rams treated with exogenous testosterone and exposed to anestrus dorper ewes: Efficacy of the male effect. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 46(3): 835-842. doi.10.1007/s10508-016-0852-x.

  20. Tilbrook, A.J, Cameron, W.N and Lindsay, D.R. (1987). The influence of ram mating preferences and social interaction between rams on the proportion of ewes mated at field joining. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 18(2): 173-184. doi.10.1016/0168- 159(87)90191-2.

  21. Ungerfeld, R. (2012). Sexual behavior of medium-ranked rams to ward non-estrual ewes is stimulated by the presence of low-ranked rams. J. Vet. Behav. 7: 847. doi.10.1016/j.jveb.2011. 05.023.

  22. Ungerfeld, R. and González-Pensado, S.P. (2008). Social rank af fects reproductive development in male lambs. Animal Reproduction Science. 109(1-4): 161-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci. 2007.12.006.

  23. Ungerfeld, R. and Núñez, M.L. (2011). Jerarquía y dominancia en grupos de carneros: Establecimi ento y efectos sobre la reproducción. Veterinaria (Montevideo). 47(184): 11-16. Recuperado de http://www.revistasmvu.com.uy/index. php/smvu/article/view/192.

  24. Ungerfeld, R., Ramos, M.A. and Möller, R. (2006). Role of the vomeronasal organ on ram’s courtship and mating behaviour and on mate choice among estrous ewes. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 99(3-4): 248-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2005.10.016. 

Editorial Board

View all (0)