Alternative Reproductive Tactics 2008
DOI: 10.1017/cbo9780511542602.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Alternative reproductive tactics in primates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
31
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 169 publications
0
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Additionally, the efficacy of many tactics is rankdependent, meaning that males must invest in status competition over a long period of time to succeed. Thus, primates frequently adopt alternative mating tactics that offer a low-cost possibility of siring infants (Setchell 2008;Taborsky et al 2008;van Schaik et al 2004). Examples include the use of sneaky copulations (e.g., Cebus apella nigritus: Alfaro 2005) and consortships (e.g., Pan troglodytes: Wroblewski et al 2009) by subordinates in mating systems in which competition is high and alpha males secure the majority of matings.…”
Section: How Do Costs Of Mating Effort Influence Male Mating Tactics?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, the efficacy of many tactics is rankdependent, meaning that males must invest in status competition over a long period of time to succeed. Thus, primates frequently adopt alternative mating tactics that offer a low-cost possibility of siring infants (Setchell 2008;Taborsky et al 2008;van Schaik et al 2004). Examples include the use of sneaky copulations (e.g., Cebus apella nigritus: Alfaro 2005) and consortships (e.g., Pan troglodytes: Wroblewski et al 2009) by subordinates in mating systems in which competition is high and alpha males secure the majority of matings.…”
Section: How Do Costs Of Mating Effort Influence Male Mating Tactics?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The within-population variability of life-history parameters, such as age at sexual maturity or interbirth interval, may help subordinates to minimize the drawbacks of their low dominance rank. For example, subordinate individuals might have shorter interbirth intervals as a strategy to maximize their fitness (Setchell, 2008). Because of the observed variance among populations, it can be difficult to assign a species-specific value for these traits.…”
Section: Factors Affecting Rank-related Benefits In Primatesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, variability in female estrous synchrony between troops or breeding seasons can result in different opportunities for dominant males to monopolize females (Ostner et al, 2008). Similarly, a greater frequency of copulations by dominant males does not always result in a higher reproductive success (Itoigawa et al, 1992;Paul et al, 1993; but see Alberts et al, 2006), possibly because of effective counter-strategies by subordinate males (e.g., sneaky copulations) that may limit the benefits of dominance (Berard et al, 1993;Setchell, 2008). Moreover, discrepancies between studies on the same species may also be due to differences in observational setting (e.g., opportunities for sneaky copulations by subordinates in captivity may be low in comparison to the wild due to the small size of the enclosure), methodology, and/or sample size (either in terms of number of individuals studied or duration of the study).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Incomplete control models hypothesize that dominant individuals have limited control over access to mates and simply cannot prevent others from mating [5]. For example, in primates, many factors limit a dominant male's ability to monopolize mates, including female reproductive synchrony and the number of male competitors [6], as well as alternative reproductive strategies such as male-male coalitions and female mate choice (reviewed in [7]). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%