MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416245308 · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2025.123387

The role of touch in marine mammal society: a review and future directions

2025· article· en· W4416245308 on OpenAlexafffund
Ana Eguiguren, Sam F. Walmsley, Laura Feyrer, Elizabeth Zwamborn, Hal Whitehead

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Behaviour · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityTrinity Western UniversityDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam Trusts
KeywordsSocial relationshipModalitiesSocial relationSocial animalSocial behaviorStimulus modalitySocial groupSocial environment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While social living has many advantages, it also has significant challenges associated with differences in individual needs and abilities. Individuals in social species communicate across sensory modalities to mediate their relationships. Affiliative touch, defined here as nonaggressive physical contact between conspecifics, plays a well-documented role in establishing, affirming and repairing social bonds and facilitating cooperation in some terrestrial taxa. However, the degree to which touch is involved in affiliative behaviours in nonterrestrial species is poorly understood. Marine mammals represent a valuable opportunity for deepening our understanding of the behavioural mechanisms that enable social living through a comparative approach, as they have unique adaptations to different levels of aquatic life and environments and display diverse social structures. Here, we reviewed current trends in research on social touch in marine mammals and evaluated existing evidence for its affiliative functions. Overall, touch was involved in mediating a range of relations, from short interactions with ‘strangers’ to repeated interactions with lifelong associates. We found that the prevalence of tactile interactions outside the mother–infant relationship was generally associated with a species' social structure. But, because of the logistical challenges associated with observing touch in species that spend most of their lives underwater, only a few odontocete species and captive populations dominate the existing literature focused on touch and social interactions. We suggest that leveraging emerging technologies (e.g. uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs), animal-borne cameras and thermal cameras), alongside long-term monitoring and study designs that ensure comparability, can expand and deepen our understanding of how animals mediate their social relationships. • Touch is involved in mediating social relationships across terrestrial species. • We review the knowledge and gaps on the social role of touch in marine mammals. • Touch mediates a range of relations and is often associated with social structure. • However, most studies have focused on only a few species or captive populations. • New technologies allow us to study social touch in previously hard-to-access taxa.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal BehaviourSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207