Vervet monkeys greet adult males during high-risk situations

Mercier, Stephanie; Neumann, Christof; Waal, Erica van de; Chollet, Emmeline; Bellefon, Jade Meric de; Zuberbühler, Klaus

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2017.07.021

Cited by 19 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If such signals involve vocalizations, they are usually termed ‘greeting calls’—broadly defined as calls produced when approaching, or being approached by, another individual [6,7]. Several more specific functions have been proposed for greeting calls, such as reinforcing social relationships (dominance [4,8]; social bonds [9]), reconciling after a conflict [10,11], facilitating reunions [7] or recruiting social support [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural patterns of vocal greeting production in four primate species

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social animals have evolved a range of signals to avoid aggressive and facilitate affiliative interactions. Vocal behaviour is especially important in this respect with many species, including various primates, producing acoustically distinct ‘greeting calls’ when two individuals approach each other. While the ultimate function of greeting calls has been explored in several species, little effort has been made to understand the mechanisms of this behaviour across species. The aim of this study was to explore how differences in individual features (individual dominance rank), dyadic relationships (dominance distance and social bond strength) and audience composition (presence of high-ranking or strongly bonded individuals in proximity), related to vocal greeting production during approaches between two individuals in the philopatric sex of four primate species: female olive baboons ( Papio anubis ), male chimpanzees ( Pan troglodytes ), female sooty mangabeys ( Cercocebus atys ) and female vervet monkeys ( Chlorocebus pygerythrus ). We found that female vervet monkeys did not produce greeting calls, while in the other three species, low-ranking individuals were more likely to call than high-ranking ones. The effects of dyadic dominance relationships differed in species-specific ways, with calling being positively associated with the rank distance between two individuals in baboons and chimpanzees, but negatively in mangabeys. In none of the tested species did we find strong evidence for an effect of dyadic affiliative relationships or audience on call production. These results likely reflect deeper evolutionary layers of species-specific peculiarities in social style. We conclude that a comparative approach to investigate vocal behaviour has the potential to not only better understand the mechanisms mediating social signal production but also to shed light on their evolutionary trajectories.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioural patterns of vocal greeting production in four primate species

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Positive selection may particularly shape contact call evolution in species when reproductive benefits are accrued through coalition formation, and vocalizations enhance cohesion between coalition partners, such as in chimpanzees. Contact calls can be loud, reaching across hundreds of metres, or quiet, reaching only 50–150 m. Examples of quiet calls used to maintain contact within social groups are the coo calls of Japanese macaques [ 28 ], the peeps of bonobos [ 29 ] or the ‘move’ grunts of chacma baboons [ 30 ] and vervet monkeys [ 31 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chimpanzee quiet hoo variants differ according to context

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In comparative studies of evolution of communication, the function and use of animal quiet calls have typically been understudied, despite that these signals are presumably under selection like other vocalizations, such as alarm calls. Here, we examine vocalization diversification of chimpanzee quiet ‘hoos’ produced in three contexts—travel, rest and alert—and potential pressures promoting diversification. Previous playback and observational studies have suggested that the overarching function of chimpanzee hoos is to stay in contact with others, particularly bond partners. We conducted an acoustic analysis of hoos using audio recordings from wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) of Budongo Forest, Uganda. We identified three acoustically distinguishable, context-specific hoo variants. Each call variant requires specific responses from receivers to avoid breaking up the social unit. We propose that callers may achieve coordination by using acoustically distinguishable calls, advertising their own behavioural intentions. We conclude that natural selection has acted towards acoustically diversifying an inconspicuous, quiet vocalization, the chimpanzee hoo. This evolutionary process may have been favoured by the fact that signallers and recipients share the same goal, to maintain social cohesion, particularly among those who regularly cooperate, suggesting that call diversification has been favoured by the demands of cooperative activities.

show abstract

“…However, the efforts to do so are not futile, and diligent studies of animal behavior have been able to relate idiosyncratic vocalizations to specific social or environmental contexts. Ample species are known to emit acoustically distinct calls to alert their peers to danger (Evans, Evans, & Marler, 1993; Manser et al, 2002; Schel et al, 2013; Seyfarth et al, 1980; Zuberbühler, 2001), announce the presence of food (Caine, Addington, & Windfelder, 1995; Evans & Marler, 1994; King & Janik, 2015; Slocombe & Zuberbühler, 2006; Vitale, Zanzoni, Queyras, & Chiarotti, 2003), coordinate group movement (Boinski, 1993; Crockford, Gruber, & Zuberbühler, 2018; Janik & Slater, 1998; Wilkinson & Boughman, 1998), maintain or challenge social bonds (Fedurek, Slocombe, & Zuberbühler, 2015; Gouzoules, Gouzoules, & Marler, 1984; Knörnschild, Feifel, & Kalko, 2013; Mercier et al, 2017), or advertise one’s qualities while attempting to impress a rival or a possible mate (Behr & von Helversen, 2004; Bloomfield, Gentner, & Margoliash, 2011; Thorpe, 1958; Tyack, 1981).…”

Section: Semantic Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Animals Have No Language, and Humans Are Animals Too

Prat

2019

Perspect Psychol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language is a cornerstone of human culture, yet the evolution of this cognitive-demanding ability is shrouded in mystery. Studying how different species demonstrate this trait can provide clues for its evolutionary route. Indeed, recent decades saw ample scientific attempts to compare human speech, the prominent behavioral manifestation of language, with other animals’ vocalizations. Diligent studies have found only elementary parallels to speech in other animals, fortifying the belief that language is uniquely human. But have we really tested this uniqueness claim? Surprisingly, a true impartial comparison between human speech and other animals’ vocalizations has hardly ever been conducted. Here, I illustrate how treating humans as an equal species in vocal-communication research is expected to provide us with no evidence for human superiority in this realm. Thus, novel balanced and unbiased comparative studies are vital for identifying any unique component of human speech and language.

show abstract

Vervet monkeys greet adult males during high-risk situations

Cited by 19 publications

References 80 publications

Behavioural patterns of vocal greeting production in four primate species

Behavioural patterns of vocal greeting production in four primate species

Chimpanzee quiet hoo variants differ according to context

Animals Have No Language, and Humans Are Animals Too

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About