20 research outputs found

    Trading or coercion? Variation in male mating strategies between two communities of East African chimpanzees

    Get PDF
    Across taxa, males employ a variety of mating strategies, including sexual coercion and the provision, or trading, of resources. Biological Market theory (BMT) predicts that trading of commodities for mating opportunities should exist only when males cannot monopolise access to females and/or obtain mating by force, in situations where power differentials between males are low; both coercion and trading have been reported for chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Here, we investigate whether the choice of strategy depends on the variation in male power differentials, using data from two wild communities of East African chimpanzees (P.t. schweinfurthii): the structurally despotic Sonso community (Budongo, Uganda) and the structurally egalitarian M-group (Mahale, Tanzania). We found evidence of sexual coercion by male Sonso chimpanzees, and of trading—of grooming for mating—by M-group males; females traded sex for neither meat nor protection from male aggression. Our results suggest that the despotism–egalitarian axis influences strategy choice: male chimpanzees appear to pursue sexual coercion when power differentials are large and trading when power differentials are small and coercion consequently ineffective. Our findings demonstrate that trading and coercive strategies are not restricted to particular chimpanzee subspecies; instead, their occurrence is consistent with BMT predictions. Our study raises interesting, and as yet unanswered, questions regarding female chimpanzees’ willingness to trade sex for grooming, if doing so represents a compromise to their fundamentally promiscuous mating strategy. It highlights the importance of within-species cross-group comparisons and the need for further study of the relationship between mating strategy and dominance steepness

    Cooperation in wild Barbary macaques: factors affecting free partner choice

    Get PDF
    A key aspect of cooperation is partner choice: choosing the best available partner improves the chances of a successful cooperative interaction and decreases the likelihood of being exploited. However, in studies on cooperation subjects are rarely allowed to freely choose their partners. Group-living animals live in a complex social environment where they can choose among several social partners differing in, for example, sex, age, temperament, or dominance status. Our study investigated whether wild Barbary macaques succeed to cooperate using an experimental apparatus, and whether individual and social factors affect their choice of partners and the degree of cooperation. We used the string pulling task that requires two monkeys to manipulate simultaneously a rope in order to receive a food reward. The monkeys were free to interact with the apparatus or not and to choose their partner. The results showed that Barbary macaques are able to pair up with a partner to cooperate using the apparatus. High level of tolerance between monkeys was necessary for the initiation of successful cooperation, while strong social bond positively affected the maintenance of cooperative interactions. Dominance status, sex, age, and temperament of the subjects also affected their choice and performance. These factors thus need to be taken into account in cooperative experiment on animals. Tolerance between social partners is likely to be a prerequisite for the evolution of cooperation

    Classifying chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) landscapes across large scale environmental gradients in Africa

    Get PDF
    Primates are sometimes categorized in terms of their habitat. Although such categorization can be over-simplistic, there are scientific benefits from the clarity and consistency that habitat categorization can bring. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) inhabit various environments, but researchers often refer to ‘forest’ or ‘savanna’ chimpanzees. Despite the wide use of this forest-savanna distinction, clear definitions of these landscapes for chimpanzees, based on environmental variables at study sites or determined in relation to existing bioclimatic classifications, are lacking. The robustness of the forest-savanna distinction thus remains to be assessed. We review 43 chimpanzee study sites to assess how the landscape classifications of researchers fit with the environmental characteristics of study sites and with three bioclimatic classifications. We use scatterplots and Principal Components 15 Analysis to assess the distribution of chimpanzee field sites along gradients of environmental 16 variables (temperature, rainfall, precipitation seasonality, forest cover and satellite-derived 17 Hansen tree cover). This revealed an environmental continuum of chimpanzee study sites 18 from savanna to dense forest, with a rarely acknowledged forest mosaic category in between, 19 but with no natural separation into these three classes and inconsistencies with the bioclimatic 20 classifications assessed. The current forest–savanna dichotomy therefore masks a progression 21 of environmental adaptation for chimpanzees, and we propose that recognizing an additional, 22 intermediate ‘forest mosaic’ category is more meaningful than focusing on the ends of this 23 environmental gradient only. Future studies should acknowledge this habitat continuum, place their study sites on the forest–savanna gradient, and include detailed environmental data to support further attempts at quantification
    corecore