Study
Group territoriality and the benefits of sociality in the African lion, Panthera leo
Mosser, Anna; Packer, Craig
Animal Behaviour, 2009
Decades of records on pride composition, territory location and reproductive success were combined to test whether larger female groups gain territorial advantages, and whether territory quality translates into offspring survival.
- Studied in
- Panthera leo
- Sample size
- Serengeti prides followed over decades with territory mapping
Larger female groups win encounters with smaller ones, acquire and hold better territories — particularly river confluences — and produce more surviving offspring. Territory quality, rather than group size alone, predicts reproductive success. Neighbouring prides constitute the principal competitive pressure.
What it means
The authors' reading, and ours. Where they differ, that difference is the point.
How the authors put it
Sociality in female lions is maintained by the competitive advantage larger groups hold in territorial contests, with territory quality the mechanism linking group size to fitness.
How NatureHQ reads it
This completes the argument the 1990 paper opened. If lions are not social for hunting, what maintains it — and the answer is that other lions do. Bigger groups take the good ground, the good ground is river confluences where prey concentrate, and cubs born there survive better. The competition that shapes lion society is with other prides rather than with prey, which is why territory maps predict reproductive success better than hunting success does.
- One ecosystem, though with exceptional temporal depth.
- Territory quality is inferred from landscape features and observed use.
- Correlational: group size cannot be manipulated experimentally.
What this study is used for on NatureHQ
One study can inform several subjects. Here is everywhere this one is cited.
Published by: Elsevier journalsPublished in an Elsevier journal.
doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.04.024
This reference was resolved automatically against Crossref on 2026-08-11.
NatureHQ summarises research in its own words and does not reproduce published text. Reviewed 2026-08-11.