Social mates dynamically coordinate aggressive behavior to produce strategic territorial defense
Fig 3
Behavioral network shows population level paired response to an average threat simulated intruder.
Network analysis and clustering pipeline reveals distinct patterns in how resident pairs organize their defense. A) Territorial network graph where each shape (node) represents a behavior and the lines (edges) connecting nodes depict significant correlations. Solid green lines indicate positive correlations and dashed pink lines indicate negative correlations. Line width (edge weight) indicates the relative strength of the correlation (Spearman’s rho). B) Same territorial network plotted along eigenvector 1 (x-axis) and eigenvector 2 (y-axis) of the signed Laplacian matrix. Distance between nodes in eigenspace is informative, such that closer nodes are more similar in performance and more distant nodes are less similar. Nodes are jittered slightly for visualization. C) Motifs of related behaviors determined through spectral clustering of the full network. Each motif is composed of behaviors that are likely to be deployed together during a single territorial defense bout. Arrows indicate significant sequential transitions between behaviors, indicating that one behavior is likely to follow another x% of the time. Dashed arrows indicate that the transition likelihood was relatively low (<10%), but still significantly different than the null expectation. Distance in the motif panel is not informative.