Title |
Evidence for mutual assessment in a wild primate
|
---|---|
Published in |
Scientific Reports, June 2017
|
DOI | 10.1038/s41598-017-02903-w |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Marcela E. Benítez, David J. Pappano, Jacinta C. Beehner, Thore J. Bergman |
Abstract |
In aggressive interactions, game theory predicts that animals should assess an opponent's condition relative to their own prior to escalation or retreat. Despite the benefits of such mutual assessment, few studies have been able to reject simpler assessment strategies. Here we report evidence for mutual assessment in a wild primate. Gelada (Theropithecus gelada) males have conspicuous loud calls that may function as a signal of male quality. "Leader" males with harems putatively use loud calls to deter challenges from non-reproductive "bachelor" males. By contrast, leader males pose no threat to each other and congregate in large groups for a dilution effect against bachelors. In playback experiments and natural observations, gelada males responded to loud calls according to both their own and their opponent's attributes. Although primates routinely classify others relative to themselves using individual attributes, this represents some of the first direct evidence for mutual assessment in primate signaling contests. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 6 | 43% |
United Kingdom | 2 | 14% |
Hong Kong | 1 | 7% |
South Africa | 1 | 7% |
Japan | 1 | 7% |
Spain | 1 | 7% |
Unknown | 2 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 9 | 64% |
Members of the public | 5 | 36% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 45 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 22% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
Unspecified | 3 | 7% |
Other | 9 | 20% |
Unknown | 10 | 22% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 39% |
Psychology | 5 | 11% |
Unspecified | 3 | 7% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
Mathematics | 1 | 2% |
Other | 6 | 13% |
Unknown | 11 | 24% |