Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

On the Ultimate Causes of Primate Social Systems

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Behaviour

[The aim of this review is to present a coherent explanation of the ultimate causation and the evolution of primary social systems. The explanation is based on the assumption that social systems of all diurnal primates are derived from female defence polygyny. Group living is therefore regarded as the essential first step in the social evolution of diurnal primates. Primate social systems are generally classified into four main types, each of which can be contrasted with the others along the following lines: solitariness versus group living, monogamy versus polygyny and reproductive activity by only one male versus reproduction of several males per group. First of all we present some comparative evidence to support the hypothesis that monogamy in primates has evolved from polygynous groups, in two different ways. A commonly held view is that monogamy is most likely to develop where paternal care of the offspring is advantageous. This is almost certainly the case in the very small species of primates. In these monogamy is the consequence of twinning and the resultant need for active paternal care. It runs contrary to the evident tendency of these species to form larger groups in response to the pressure of predation. The latter is achieved by an extended group membership of grown-up offspring in a non-reproductive and even 'helping' rôle. In the larger species, however, monogamy is most probably the outcome of, on the one hand, a strong need to reduce competition for food favouring very small group sizes, and, on the other hand, of the virtual absence of predation permitting such a development. Secondly, we look critically at several hypothetical explanations for the existence of multi-male groups and one-male groups. We argue that the ultimate explanation for their existence is not to be found in differential male mortality, anti-predator defence, availability of food, and differential expulsion of "expendable" males. Instead, comparative evidence indicates that the distinction between a single-male or a multi-male system is ultimately dependent on the varying ability of a male to monopolize access to a breeding group of females. This ability in turn depends on group cohesiveness as determined by feeding strategies and predation pressure and is often, though not necessarily, related to the size of the group., The aim of this review is to present a coherent explanation of the ultimate causation and the evolution of primary social systems. The explanation is based on the assumption that social systems of all diurnal primates are derived from female defence polygyny. Group living is therefore regarded as the essential first step in the social evolution of diurnal primates. Primate social systems are generally classified into four main types, each of which can be contrasted with the others along the following lines: solitariness versus group living, monogamy versus polygyny and reproductive activity by only one male versus reproduction of several males per group. First of all we present some comparative evidence to support the hypothesis that monogamy in primates has evolved from polygynous groups, in two different ways. A commonly held view is that monogamy is most likely to develop where paternal care of the offspring is advantageous. This is almost certainly the case in the very small species of primates. In these monogamy is the consequence of twinning and the resultant need for active paternal care. It runs contrary to the evident tendency of these species to form larger groups in response to the pressure of predation. The latter is achieved by an extended group membership of grown-up offspring in a non-reproductive and even 'helping' rôle. In the larger species, however, monogamy is most probably the outcome of, on the one hand, a strong need to reduce competition for food favouring very small group sizes, and, on the other hand, of the virtual absence of predation permitting such a development. Secondly, we look critically at several hypothetical explanations for the existence of multi-male groups and one-male groups. We argue that the ultimate explanation for their existence is not to be found in differential male mortality, anti-predator defence, availability of food, and differential expulsion of "expendable" males. Instead, comparative evidence indicates that the distinction between a single-male or a multi-male system is ultimately dependent on the varying ability of a male to monopolize access to a breeding group of females. This ability in turn depends on group cohesiveness as determined by feeding strategies and predation pressure and is often, though not necessarily, related to the size of the group.]

Affiliations: 1: (Laboratory of Comparative Physiology, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands

10.1163/156853983X00057
/content/journals/10.1163/156853983x00057
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/156853983x00057
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/156853983x00057
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/156853983x00057
1983-01-01
2016-12-09

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Behaviour — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation