A NOTE ON THE SUCKLING BEHAVIOUR OF TJ3E VIVERRID, Suricata suricatta (Schreber)

BY R. F. EWER The Department of Zoology, Rhodes University, South Africa*

In the domestic cat it has been found (Ewer, 1959, 1960) that kittens do not feed from the maternal teats at random, During the first few days of life each kitten gradually establishes ownership of one teat and then rarely feeds from any other. Only exceptionally does one kitten come to own more than one teat: so strong is the tendency for each kitten to restrict itself to a single teat that even in two litters artificially reduced to two kittens each, only one of the four took possession of two teats.

Some degree of teat constancy is also shown by pigs (Donald, 1937) but whether it occurs in other polytocous mammals is not known. The birth of a litter of young to a pair of Suricata suricatta kept as domestic pets provided an op- portunity for obtaining some information on this question in another carnivore belonging to a family considerably less specialized than the Felidae.

In Suricata the female at first suckles her young crouched over them in a way which makes it almost impossible to determine their feeding positions, Diicker (1962) gives a photo- graph of this posture. However, as the young grow, it becomes increasingly difficult for the mother to accommodate them in this posture and during their third week of life she starts to lie on her back to suckle them. At this stage the feeding positions are easily observed. The present observations were made during the 17th to 32nd days after the birth of the young. There were four in the litter, but one died during the first 24 hours, so that the litter studied comprised three individuals, designated A, B and C.

Whenever opportunity offered, the feeding positions of the young were noted and their general behaviour was observed. It was very soon apparent that teat constancy of the type shown by domestic kittens did not exist. At each feeding time each kitten would suck from several teats in turn. As a rule the three changed position more or less simultaneously, the move- ment of one to a new teat apparently stimulating *Present address: Zoology Department, University of Ghana, Legon, Accra.

its fellow to follow suit. Fights over teats were virtually non-existent.

In Suricata there are three pairs of mammary glands, with a slight antero-posterior size gradient, the anterior pair being the largest. The teats are designated as 1, 2 and 3 left and right from the front. From Fig. 1 it can be seen that there is some tendency for the teats to be used in accordance with the size of the mammary glands, the anterior pair most, the posterior least. The effect, however, is slight.

Fig. 2 shows the number of times each kitten sucked from each teat. No “ownership” is apparent; each kitten uses every teat, but there is a suggestion of a tendency for one teat in each case to be the most favoured. The differ- ence from random behaviour is, however, sign&ant only in the case of B, x&=23+8, P<O*Ol. For A and C, x($=4*6 and 9.6 re- spectively and P>O.Ol.

While making the observations the impression was gained that although each kitten might suck from any teat there was a tendency for a par- ticular starting position to be selected. A usually began a feed on 11, B on lr, while C most fre- quently began on 21 but also often selected 2r. In Fig. 3 “first takes” have been separated from the rest and plotted alone. It is clear that the initial positions adopted are by no means random. A and B select the anterior teats, while C takes the second best middle teats, with a slight preference for 21 over 2r. The subsequent

Fig. 1. Feeding frequencies for each teat: summed data for all three kittens. In this and the following diagrams the right and left teats are shown on either side of the mid line with the most anterior to the top of the figure. The number of times each is used is shown by the extent of the corresponding horizontal block.

599

600 ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR, XI, 4

positions are also shown in Fig. 3. Here the distributions are’random. The values of x(Z) for A, B and C are 2.0, 4.5 and 5.4 respectively, P in all cases >O*l. Unfortunately the data for first positions are too few to permit individual statistical treatment. If, however, the three kittens are considered together, the total number of first takes on teats 11, lr and 2r is significantly greater than the number on the . . remammg three (xc:, = 12.4,P = <O*Ol).

It is thus clear that while there is no teat constancy in Suricata the young have some ability to recognise particular teats, since each tends to select a specific one at the beginning of a feeding period. This, how- ever, does not result in the dev- elopment of ownership and each teat is used by all the litter.

Ir 2 3r

It 2r Kitten A 3r

Ir 2r

Kitten B 3r

Fig. 2. Feeding frequencies of the three kittens showndseparately. [Conventions as before.

Kitten A Ir 2r 3r

Ir IR Ir Kitten 8 21 2r

3l 3r

Ir IL Ir 2r Kitten c 21 ir 3 31 3r

I I 10

& 5 5 IO

Fig. 3. Feeding frequencies of the three kittens. Left column, initial positions: right column, subsequent positions. Conventions as before.

This situation is of some interest, since clearly specific teat recognition must develop before

which it would be possible for the specialized

ownership and consequent teat constancv can be organization of suckling behaviour found in the domestic cat to have evolved.

achieved- Recognition and initial seleciion but without ownership, as shown in Suricata, may thus represent a more primitive condition from

REFERENCES Donal<, H, P. (1937). Suckling and suckling preference

m pigs. Emp. J. exp. Agric., 5, 361-368.

EWER: A NOTE ON THE SUCKLING BEHAVIOUR OF THE VIVERRID, Suricatu suricatu (Schreber) 601

Diicker, G. (1962). Brutpflevgverhalten und Ontogenese des Verhaltens bei Surikaten (Suricatu suricutta Schreb., Viverridae). Behaviour, 19, 305-340.

Ewer, R. F. (1960). Some observations on the suckling behaviour of kittens. S. Afr. J. Sci., 56, 49-52.

Ewer, R. F. (1959). Suckling behaviour in kittens. (Accepted for publication 7th March, 1963; Behuviour, 15,146-162. Ms. No.: 341).