The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Female space use is the best predictor of monogamy in mammals
Open accessAbstract
Monogamy is typically considered to have evolved either because biparental care is important for offspring survival, or because males are unable to monopolize more than one female due to females being too dispersed. Here, in the first phylogenetic analysis of the evolution of monogamy in mammals, we show that neither of these explanations is consistent with the distribution of monogamy across mammal species. Monogamy evolved significantly more often in the absence of paternal care than in its presence. Furthermore, monogamy does not normally occur in species where female ranges are large. Rather, the most common feature of mammalian monogamy is that it evolved where females were solitary and occupied small, exclusive ranges, enabling males to monopolize them.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ecology, Sexual Selection, and the Evolution of Mating Systems
Emlen, S. T., & Oring, L. W. (1977) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.327542 · Cited by 6,230
MacClade 4.0: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution
(2001) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.39-2183 · Cited by 5,554
The comparative method in evolutionary biology
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-5104 · Cited by 4,931
The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology
Harvey, P. H., & Pagel, M. D. (1991) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198546412.001.0001 · Cited by 4,337
The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies
Ragin, C. C. (2014) · doi:10.1525/9780520957350 · Cited by 2,130
Kleiman, D. G. (1977) · The Quarterly Review of Biology · doi:10.1086/409721 · Cited by 1,436
Review Lecture: Mammalian mating systems
Clutton-Brock, T. H. (1989) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. B. Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.1989.0027 · Cited by 1,410
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1988) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-6694-2 · Cited by 1,258
Purvis, A., & Rambaut, A. (1995) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/11.3.247 · Cited by 1,096
A composite estimate of primate phylogeny
Purvis, A. (1995) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1995.0078 · Cited by 702
Cited by
Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.132 · Cited by 1,601
Brain size predicts the success of mammal species introduced into novel environments
Sol, D., Bacher, S., Reader, S. M., & Lefebvre, L. (2008) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/588304 · Cited by 437
The evolution of the social brain: anthropoid primates contrast with other vertebrates
Shultz, S., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2007) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0693 · Cited by 344
The Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids
(2004) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198515562.001.0001 · Cited by 321
Leckman, J. F., Mayes, L. C., Feldman, R., Evans, D. W., King, R. A., & Cohen, D. J. (1999) · Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1999.tb10951.x · Cited by 207
Metadata
- Authors
- Komers, P. E., & Brotherton, P. N. M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 1997-09-22
- Volume
- 264
- Issue
- 1386
- Pages
- 1261-1270
- ISSN
- 0080-4649 (ISSN-L)
- 0962-8452
- 1471-2954
- OpenAlex
- W2007102388
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 51
- FWCI
- 8.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Female space use is the best predictor of monogamy in mammals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rspb.1997.0174
- The paper
- Komers, P. E., & Brotherton, P. N. M. (1997). Female space use is the best predictor of monogamy in mammals. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1997.0174
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
