Rates of Agonism by Diurnal Lemuroids: Implications for Female Social Relationships

Abstract

Sterck and colleagues (Behaviour 134:749-774, 1997) focused attention on the evolutionary ecology of female social relationships within and between groups and proposed a model that distinguishes 4 categories of female relationships, which correspond to particular types of intra-and intergroup competition. They emphasized literature on haplorhines in their model because of numerous, detailed studies conducted on a range of species in the wild; in contrast, strepsirrhines such as the lemuroids are poorly represented. We evaluate more closely their classification of lemuroids as Dispersal-Egalitarian using a greater number of species of Lemur, Eulemur, Varecia, Hapalemur, Indri, and Propithecus. For the focal species we found that female philopatry occurs rarely, agonistic rates are relatively low, female dominance hierarchies are not stable and do not exist year-round, and intra-and intergroup female-female competition is infrequent. Therefore, our results support the suggestion that a majority of lemuroid taxa we surveyed correspond to the Dispersal-Egalitarian category with 2 probable exceptions: Lemur catta and Propithecus edwardsi. Because female Lemur catta are philopatric, have year-round dominance hierarchies with female matrilines, exhibit the highest rates of agonism in studied lemuroids, and have frequent intra-and intergroup female-female competition, it would seem that they more closely correspond to the category Resident-Nepotistic. However, maternal Lemur catta rarely support their offspring in agonistic contests and matrilineal rank is not inherited, which leads us to state that the species does not fit into any existing category that explains the nature of female social relationships. The relationships of female Propithecus edwardsi are also a challenge to categorize under the current model because some of their characteristicstypical female dispersal and low agonistic rates-fall into the Dispersal-Egalitarian category, yet other behaviors -intense targeted aggression and stable and year-round female dominance hierarchies-do not.

Sex-Typed Social Development in Lemur catta

“…All adult behavioural sex differences found in this study were consistent with previous reports [Jolly, 1966[Jolly, , 1972Budnitz and Dainis, 1975;Mertl-Millhollen, 1988;Kappeler, 1990a, b;Jolly et al, 1993;Sauther, 1993;Sauther and Sussman, 1993;Nakamichi and Koyama, 1997;Sauther et al, 1999;Gould, 1996;Nakamichi and Koyama, 2000;Gould, 2006;Erhart and Overdorff, 2008]. Also consistent with previous reports, sex differences in general proximity patterns [Gould, 1990;Pereira, 1993;Sauther and Sussman, 1993], affiliation with adult females and aggression/dominance were not exhibited by immatures.…”

Species‐level view of population structure and gene flow for a critically endangered primate (Varecia variegata)

“…That is, males within the species are considered the predominantly dispersing sex (Kappeler 1997; Morland 1991; but see Balko 1998; Erhart and Overdorff 2008; S. M. Holmes, S. E. Johnson, E. E. Louis, pers. obs.).…”

Rates of agonism among female primates: a cross-taxon perspective

“…Thus, to avoid bias and to ensure accurate and reliable values of the average number of interactions per individual and hour, we excluded all observations via ad libitum or any time sampling method (Altmann 1974; Martin and Bateson 2007). All agonistic rates used in this analysis were based exclusively on data collected through continuous focal animal sampling of identified females (see also Erhart and Overdorff 2008). We also excluded data collected solely through “all occurrence” methods at the group level (Altmann 1974; Martin and Bateson 2007) because in all but very open environments and with small cohesive groups, the entire group cannot be observed at all times.…”