Personality and the collective: bold homing pigeons occupy higher leadership ranks in flocks.

While collective movement is ecologically widespread and conveys numerous benefits on individuals, it also poses a coordination problem: who controls the group's movements? The role that animal 'personalities' play in this question has recently become a focus of research interest. Although many animal groups have distributed leadership (i.e. multiple individuals influence collective decisions), studies linking personality and leadership have focused predominantly on the group's single most influential individual. In this study, we investigate the relationship between personality and the influence of multiple leaders on collective movement using homing pigeons, Columba livia, a species known to display complex multilevel leadership hierarchies during flock flights. Our results show that more exploratory (i.e. 'bold') birds are more likely to occupy higher ranks in the leadership hierarchy and thus have more influence on the direction of collective movement than less exploratory (i.e. 'shy') birds during both free flights around their lofts and homing flights from a distant site. Our data also show that bold pigeons fly faster than shy birds during solo flights. We discuss our results in light of theories about the evolution of personality, with specific reference to the adaptive value of heterogeneity in animal groups.This article is part of the theme issue 'Collective movement ecology'.

Challenges to the Standardization of Burn Data Collection: A Call for Common Data Elements for Burn Care.

The use of common data elements (CDEs) is growing in medical research; CDEs have demonstrated benefit in maximizing the impact of existing research infrastructure and funding. However, the field of burn care does not have a standard set of CDEs. The objective of this study is to examine the extent of common data collected in current burn databases.This study examines the data dictionaries of six U.S. burn databases to ascertain the extent of common data. This was assessed from a quantitative and qualitative perspective. Thirty-two demographic and clinical data elements were examined. The number of databases that collect each data element was calculated. The data values for each data element were compared across the six databases for common terminology. Finally, the data prompts of the data elements were examined for common language and structure.Five (16%) of the 32 data elements are collected by all six burn databases; additionally, five data elements (16%) are present in only one database. Furthermore, there are considerable variations in data values and prompts used among the burn databases. Only one of the 32 data elements (age) contains the same data values across all databases.The burn databases examined show minimal evidence of common data. There is a need to develop CDEs and standardized coding to enhance interoperability of burn databases.