DOI: 10.48579/pro/dpm8vo
title: Replication data for: Fig 8.1, 8.5, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, and 8.12, Alarm calls, Males and Females, UPDs, 19 Nov 2025

description: FILE DESCRIPTION Keywords: alarm calls, UPDs, age, ARS, clan size, sex File name = Fig 8.1, 8.5, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, and 8.12, Alarm calls, Males and Females, UPDs, 19 Nov 2025 OLD Filename = UPDs, NEW alarm calls, 28 Feb 2020 05 March 2019. This file has been checked TWO TIMES. once by JLH alone, and once by JLH and MAH. Year = year when frequency of alarm calling recorded in response to moving stuffed specimen of American badger UPD = Marking scheme with Nyanzol fur dye for Utah prairie dog After a UPD died, the marking scheme was often used again for a different prairie dog in a different year Eartag = unique eartag for each UPD. The same eartag was never used again for a different prairie dog in a different year Sex = MALE or FEMALE Class caller = type of kin in home territory 0 = no known kin in home territory (r &lt;0.0313) 1 = distant kin only in home territory (first and second full or half cousins, aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces, nonlittermate siblings) For class = 1, 0.0625 &lt; r &lt; 0.2500 2 = littermate siblings in home territory 3 = mother in home territory 4 = offspring in home territory Callfreq = proportion of times UPD gave alarm call in response to stuffed badger Trials = number of experimental runs with moving stuffed badger per year Age = age in years of UPD Clan size = number of adult and yearling UPDs in same home territory Yearling offspring only indicates age of offspring in home territory 0 = juvenile offspring in home territory, with or without adult offspring as well 1 = adult offspring in home territory, with no juvenile offspring Note for Newclass caller: The number indicates the closest kin in the home territory, with or without other possible kin. Example: If a UPD had offspring and full first cousins in the home territory, the class caller would be 3 Note for littermate siblings: For this analysis, I make no attempt to discriminate between full siblings (same mother, same father) and half-siblings (same mother, different father). On 16 Feb 2019, I detect an error in this file. The eartag for female-H4 in 2000 should be V63 (not U64). I have made this correction to this file, and I will re- do whatever statistical analyses are necessary. On 05 March, this revised file is now ready for statistics. On 29 March 2019 I discover that female-92 (W65) in 2004 was LACTATING on 15 June 2004. So, on 28 March 2019 I change Newclass for female-92 from 2 to 4. On 09 April 2019, Callfreq of 4str (A47) for 1997 stays at 100%, but trials changed to 6 (instead of 5) On 09 April 2019, Callfreq of RS (A31) for 1997 changed to 66.7% (from 50%), and trials changed to 3 (from 2) On 11 April 2019, Callfreq for BB5 (E41) changed to 66,7% (from 80%) On 11 April 2019, Callfreq for HBS (A39) changed to 16.7% (from 28.6%) On 11 April 2019, Callfreq for 61 (J27) changed to 66.7% (from 50%) On 15 April 2019, Callfreq for 66 (J33) changed to 66.7% (from 80%) On 18 June 2019, Callfreq for RABR (485) in 2003 changed to 18.2% (from 10%) On 04 July, I notice that Callfreq for BB2 in APRIL 2004 should be 3/8 = 37.5% instead of 2/7 = 28.6%. I do not think this change will affect any analyses, because I do not THINK I used UPD data from APRIL (not June) 2004 for any analyses. But watch for this possibility. On 04 July, I notice that Callfreq for 59 in APRIL 2004 should be 3/6 = 50% instead of 2/5 = 40% I do not think this change will affect any analyses, because I do not THINK I used UPD data from APRIL (not June) 2004 for any analyses. But watch for this possibility. On 28 Feb 2020, I do not find any new changes to this file beyond those described above. File name = Fig 8.1, 8.5, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, and 8.12, Males and Females, UPDs, 19 Nov 2025