|
|
Sueur, C., & Petit, O. (2008). Organization of Group Members at Departure Is Driven by Social Structure in Macaca. Int. J. Primatol., 29(4), 1085–1098.
Abstract: Abstract Researchers have often explained order of progression of group members during joint movement in terms of the influence of ecological pressures but rarely that of social constraints. We studied the order of joining by group members to a movement in semifree-ranging macaques with contrasting social systems: 1 group of Tonkean macaques (Macaca tonkeana) and 1 group of rhesus macaques (M. mulatta). We used network metrics to understand roles and associations among individuals. The way the macaques joined a movement reflected the social differences between the species in terms of dominance and kinship. Old and dominant male rhesus macaques were more often at the front of the movement, contrary to the Tonkean macaques, which exhibited no specific order. Moreover, rhesus macaques preferred to join high-ranking or related individuals, whereas Tonkean macaques based associations during joining mostly on sexual relationships with a subgroup of peripheral males.
|
|
|
|
Vervaecke, H., de Vries, H., & van Elsacker, L. (2000). Dominance and its Behavioral Measures in a Captive Group of Bonobos (Pan paniscus). Int. J. Primatol., 21(1), 47–68.
Abstract: We investigated the existence of a social dominance hierarchy in the captive group of six adult bonobos at the Planckendael Zoo. We quantified the pattern of dyadic exchange of a number of behaviors to examine to what extent each behavior fits a linear rank order model. Following de Waal (1989), we distinguish three types of dominance: agonistic dominance, competitive ability and formal dominance. Fleeing upon aggression is a good measure of agonistic dominance. The agonistic dominance hierarchy in the study group shows significant and strong linearity. The rank order was: 1. female (22 yr), 2. female (15 yr)., 3. male (23 yr.), 4. female (15 yr.), 5. male (9 yr.), 6. male (10 yr.). As in the wild, the females occupy high ranks. There is prominent but nonexclusive female agonistic dominance. Teeth-baring does not fulfil the criteria of a formal submission signal. Peering is a request for tolerance of proximity. Since its direction within dyads is consistent with that of fleeing interactions, it is a useful additional measure to determine agonistic ranks in bonobos. In competitive situations, the females acquire more food than other group members do. The rank obtained from access to food resources differs from the agonistic rank due to female intrasexual social tolerance, expressed in food sharing. We typify the dominance styles in the group as female intrasexual tolerance and male challenging of rank differences. The agonistic rank order correlates significantly with age and has a strong predictive value for other social behaviors.
|
|
|
|
Wittig, R. M., & Boesch, C. (2003). Food Competition and Linear Dominance Hierarchy Among Female Chimpanzees of the Ta National Park. Int. J. Primatol., 24(4), 847–867.
Abstract: Dominance rank in female chimpanzees correlates positively with reproductive success. Although a high rank obviously has an advantage for females, clear (linear) hierarchies in female chimpanzees have not been detected. Following the predictions of the socio-ecological model, the type of food competition should affect the dominance relationships among females. We investigated food competition and relationships among 11 adult female chimpanzees in the Ta National Park, C+ete d'Ivoire (West Africa). We detected a formal linear dominance hierarchy among the females based on greeting behaviour directed from the subordinate to the dominant female. Females faced contest competition over food, and it increased when either the food was monopolizable or the number of competitors increased. Winning contests over food, but not age, was related to the dominance rank. Affiliative relationships among the females did not help to explain the absence of greetings in some dyads. However comparison post hoc among chimpanzee study sites made differences in the dominance relationships apparent. We discuss them based on social relationships among females, contest competition and predation. The cross-site comparison indicates that the differences in female dominance hierarchies among the chimpanzee study sites are affected by food competition, predation risk and observation time.
|
|
