Untitled

Kirkpatrick, R.; Long, Yongcheng; Tai, Zhong; Xiao, Lin

doi:10.1023/a:1020302809584

Cited by 138 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2009; Kirkpatrick et al . 1998) or nonephemeral young leaves in Nasalis larvatus (Boonratana 1993; Matsuda et al . 2009), so the foraging or ranging costs imposed by assembling in bands are most likely relatively insignificant (Grueter and van Schaik 2010).…”

Section: Functions Of Multilevel Societies In Nonhuman Primatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of Multilevel Social Systems in Nonhuman Primates and Humans

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multilevel (or modular) societies are a distinct type of primate social system whose key features are single-male–multifemale, core units nested within larger social bands. They are not equivalent to fission–fusion societies, with the latter referring to routine variability in associations, either on an individual or subunit level. The purpose of this review is to characterize and operationalize multilevel societies and to outline their putative evolutionary origins. Multilevel societies are prevalent in three primate clades: papionins, Asian colobines, and hominins. For each clade, we portray the most parsimonious phylogenetic pathway leading to a modular system and then review and discuss likely socioecological conditions promoting the establishment and maintenance of these societies. The multilevel system in colobines (most notably Rhinopithecus and Nasalis ) has likely evolved as single-male harem systems coalesced, whereas the multilevel system of papionins ( Papio hamadryas , Theropithecus gelada ) and hominins most likely arose as multimale–multifemale groups split into smaller units. We hypothesize that, although ecological conditions acted as preconditions for the origin of multilevel systems in all three clades, a potentially important catalyst was intraspecific social threat, predominantly bachelor threat in colobines and female coercion/infanticide in papionins and humans. We emphasize that female transfers within bands or genetic relationships among leader males help to maintain modular societies by facilitating interunit tolerance. We still lack a good or even basic understanding of many facets of multilevel sociality. Key remaining questions are how the genetic structure of a multilevel society matches the observed social effort of its members, to what degree cooperation of males of different units is manifest and contributes to band cohesion, and how group coordination, communication, and decision making are achieved. Affiliative and cooperative interunit relations are a hallmark of human societies, and studying the precursors of intergroup pacification in other multilevel primates may provide insights into the evolution of human uniqueness.

show abstract

Section: Functions Of Multilevel Societies In Nonhuman Primatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of Multilevel Social Systems in Nonhuman Primates and Humans

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social grouping have many levels in a number of species, for example in zebras, where males with harems group for mutual defense [82]; and similar social composition was found in Yunnan snub-nosed monkeys ( Rhinopithecus bieti ) [83]. Furthermore dolphins [44,45] and African elephants [43] also have multi-tiered social organization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cooperators Unite! Assortative linking promotes cooperation particularly for medium sized associations

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEvolution of cooperative behaviour is widely studied in different models where interaction is heterogeneous, although static among individuals. However, in nature individuals can often recognize each other and chose, besides to cooperate or not, to preferentially associate with or to avoid certain individuals.Here we consider a dynamical interaction graph, in contrast to a static one. We propose several rules of rejecting unwanted partners and seeking out new ones, and study the probability of emergence and maintenance of cooperation on these dynamic networks.ResultsOur simulations reveal that cooperation can evolve and be stable in the population if we introduce preferential linking, even if defectors can perform it too. The fixation of cooperation has higher probability than that of on static graphs, and this effect is more prevalent at high benefit to cost ratios. We also find an optimal number of partners, for which the fixation probability of cooperation shows a maximum.ConclusionsThe ability to recognize, seek out or avoid interaction partners based on the outcome of past interactions has an important effect on the emergence of cooperation. Observations about the number of partners in natural cooperating groups are in concordance with the result of our model.

show abstract

“…According to several surveys (Kirkpatrick et al, 1998;Ren et al, 2008Ren et al, , 2009, the main daily travel distance varies between 350 m and 3000 m with an average of about 1500 m. These movements are mainly for foraging. Dispersal events are poorly known but are considered highly probable because some subadult males leave their natal group to join others (Grueter, 2003).…”

Section: Study Speciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A hierarchical cluster analysis on the genetic distance matrix (Li et al, 2014a) has shown that monkey groups were structured in 5 cluster management units characterized by a genetic similarity among individuals. The snub-nosed monkey preferentially uses trees for moving but it is also able to cross open areas like meadows on short distances (Grueter, 2003;Kirkpatrick et al, 1998). According to the observations of Long Yongcheng (pers.…”

Section: Study Speciesmentioning

confidence: 99%