Primate socioecology Flashcards
what is anti predator behavior
- activity patterns; diurnal/nocturnal
- predator calls (vervets)
- group dynamics (dilution effect, selfish herd, vigilance, alarm calls, safety in numbers)
safety in #s example
red colombus monkeys live with diana monkeys
what is a primate social organization composed of
group formation
mating system
dominance (hierarchy)
coaliations
dispersal patterns
principles of primates
anti predator behaviour
competition
dominance
sex differences in sex stratgies
infanticie
what types of food competition are there (WHEN FOOD IS A LIMITING FACTOR)
scramble
contest
scramble competition
food is dispersed and available
resources not monopolizeable
so MM competitio for fmeales is a SCRAMBLE
often low value resources ;i.e. gorillas or howlers live in terriestial herbaceous habitats
efficnency determiend by amount
aggression, kin support and rank stabillity is low
migration, non liniear egalitarian and individualistic group structures
contest competition
food is limtied and clumped
monopolizable as MM competition for FM is a CONTEST
chimps and aggression= uneven gain
common aggression, kin support, high rank stabillity
linear despotic nepotisic group structures
i.e. chimps and vervets
when fod is not limiting…
no aggression, dominance, home range etc
when food is limiting..
intergroup aggression
if clumped; dominance effect
if disperesed; no dominance effect
WGS
within group scramble; impacted by group size
per capita food intake–> high in small groups but dominance not too important
large groups have differential food intake between HR and LR
BGS
between group scramble; potential dominance
WGC
within group contest; dominance effect for per capita food intake
more animals= less to eat= hence rank has a strong influence on what and when you can eat
hence female ALLIANCES are important
leads to resident nepotistic societies
BGC
between group contest: population density
percapita food intake depends on dominance
sexual strategies
intrasexual
intersexual
intersexual competition
males compete against other males
sperm competition; differential testes size = mating system
intrinsic qualities (dominance); so subordinates sneaky matings and deception
friendships and coalitions
intrasexual
males compete for females
need:
attractiveness
male health
gene compatibility
male services (resources, care, protection)
benefits for male infanticide
enhance RS
prevent parenting to unrelated child
shorten ibi
father next infant
female counter strategies to infantcid
defend infant
other fanther/friends defend infant
hide ovulation
synchronize ovulation
mate while pregantn
mate with male males
india vs nepal primate langur
INDIA; provisioned (escapes tough environmental conditions) so females can have asynchronous fertility–> leads to monopolization by a male (harem) and higher infanticide
NEPAL: tough environmental conditions; females synchronize in summer (seasonality);
india vs nepal primate langur
INDIA; provisioned (escapes tough environmental conditions) so females can have asynchronous fertility–> leads to monopolization by a male (harem) and higher infanticide
NEPAL: tough environmental conditions; females synchronize in summer (seasonality);
leads to multi-male multi-female promiscuous systems; less infanticide but higher sperm competition
wrangham 1980: resources and male-female reslationships
females: food safety
males: ferliziations
so food distribution, predation risk–> impact where females are
infanticide risk–> if females have friends
females–> comeptition type–> social relationships
number of males
number of females and synchronocy of females; whether or not they are monopolizable
dominacne hiearchies
monopolizable resources
permanent residency (of males)
mate guarding
predator defence
infant protection
i.e. rhesus macaques
costa rica vs peru squirrel monkeys
in CR:
- small and many fruit treest
so egaliatrian and high female dispersal
PERU:
large fruit trees and few
leads to linear dominacne hierarchies, little female dispression
egalitarian strcutures + ranking
LOW WGC/BGS and yes/no philopatrry
nepotistic/desspotiic ranking
highWGC and low BGS; yes philopatry
nepotistic tolerant rankings
high WGC and HIGH BGS; yes philopatry
how does socioecoloy function
environment: where can i survive?
grouping structuree: who lives with whom
mating structure: who mates with whom?
breeding structre: who reproduces with whom?
ecoloical pressures and sex selection
FF need more paternal care; limited resource food and safety
MM; increase fitness by maximizing gertliziations; limited resources are FF
so RS variance stronger among MM than FF
why do FF live in groups?
intrinsic factors—> socialiaty difficult as gregariousness leads to increasex competition
so extrinsic factors lead to FF to clumpb (resource defence, predator defence)
resource defense
social prssure from conspecifics (wrangham 1979);
birth rates increase as group size increases eso intragroup competition outweights intergroup competition in very large groups
preadtor defences
van schaik 1983: ecological presssure from predators
birth rates decline with increasing group size because nothing counterats within group competition
predator defence vs resource defense
Dunbar 1988 tested:
predation risks sets lower limit
within group competition sets upper limit
BGC + WGS
per capita food intake higher in for more dominance groups (larger groups) than smaller suborrdinate groups
resident egalitarian (as some participation is needed; collective action problem)
BGS and WGC
Per capita food intake higher in large groups and dependent on within group dominance status
high female philopatry, lienar dominacne hiearchy and resident-nepoistic tolerant
MM map themslves on FF distribution..
spatial: females go to food
temporal: synchronicity of female fertillity
diespresed FF distribution
either solitary or desynchronized grouops= leads to monogamy/polygyny
clumped FF distribution
females in group might have synchronized by seasonal habitat= polygynandrouns or non-monopolizable (baboons)
variations of MM and FF distribution
FF chimps monpolized by coalltion of MM
oranguatns monpolized by single male because descynhorinized
gibbons engage in EPC depsite monogamy
polygyny threshold model
where MM defend resources/range instead of chasing after ff;
‘better to be second wife of rich man’
likely to lead to polygyny when there territories have different value in terms of resources (food shelter microcalimate etc)
agonistic relationships dimensions
- egalitrian to despotic
- individual to nepotistic (RANK AND RELATIVE)
- TOLERANCE (TOLERANCE INCREASE= DECREASE OF AGGRESSION; increase in reconciliation)
additional factors that impact priamte social systems
risk of infanticide
habitat saturation
classes of female social relationships
Dispersien Egalitarian
Resident Nepoistic
Resident Nepoistic Tolerant
Resident Egaliatrian
