The evolution of female social relationships in nonhuman primates |
| |
Authors: | Elisabeth H M Sterck David P Watts Carel P van Schaik |
| |
Institution: | (1) Ethology and Socioecology, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80086, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands Fax: +31.30.252.1105; e-mail: sterck@neuretp.biol.ruu.nl, NL;(2) Department of Anthropology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06250, USA, US;(3) Department of Biological Anthropology and Anatomy, Duke University, Box 90383, Durham, NC 27708, USA, US |
| |
Abstract: | Considerable interspecific variation in female social relationships occurs in gregarious primates, particularly with regard
to agonism and cooperation between females and to the quality of female relationships with males. This variation exists alongside
variation in female philopatry and dispersal. Socioecological theories have tried to explain variation in female-female social
relationships from an evolutionary perspective focused on ecological factors, notably predation and food distribution. According
to the current “ecological model”, predation risk forces females of most diurnal primate species to live in groups; the strength
of the contest component of competition for resources within and between groups then largely determines social relationships
between females. Social relationships among gregarious females are here characterized as Dispersal-Egalitarian, Resident-Nepotistic,
Resident-Nepotistic-Tolerant, or Resident-Egalitarian. This ecological model has successfully explained differences in the
occurrence of formal submission signals, decided dominance relationships, coalitions and female philopatry. Group size and
female rank generally affect female reproduction success as the model predicts, and studies of closely related species in
different ecological circumstances underscore the importance of the model. Some cases, however, can only be explained when
we extend the model to incorporate the effects of infanticide risk and habitat saturation. We review evidence in support of
the ecological model and test the power of alternative models that invoke between-group competition, forced female philopatry,
demographic female recruitment, male interventions into female aggression, and male harassment. Not one of these models can
replace the ecological model, which already encompasses the between-group competition. Currently the best model, which explains
several phenomena that the ecological model does not, is a “socioecological model” based on the combined importance of ecological
factors, habitat saturation and infanticide avoidance. We note some points of similarity and divergence with other mammalian
taxa; these remain to be explored in detail.
Received: 30 September 1996 / Accepted after revision: 20 July 1997 |
| |
Keywords: | Primate social organization Competition Infanticide Habitat saturation |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|