Cited by 39Primate Behavior and EcologyAnimal Vocal Communication and BehaviorMarine animal studies overview

Grunt to go—Vocal coordination of group movements in redfronted lemurs

Sperber, Anna Lucia, Werner, Lynne M., Kappeler, Peter M., Fichtel, Claudia·2017·Ethology

Abstract

To remain cohesive as a group, individuals must coordinate their movements between resources. In many species, vocalisations are used in this context. While some species have specific movement calls, others use calls which are also employed in different contexts. The use of such multicontextual calls has rarely been studied quantitatively, especially during both the pre‐departure and departure period associated with collective decisions. We thus investigated the use of close calls (“grunts”) for the coordination of collective movements in four groups of wild redfronted lemurs (Eulemur rufifrons) in Kirindy Forest, Western Madagascar. Group movements are started by an initiator, who moves away from the group and is joined by followers setting out in the same direction. We observed collective movements and recorded vocalisations from 18 focal individuals (54 movements recorded for followers, 21 for initiators). The grunt rate of both initiators and followers was higher in the pre‐departure period than in a control context (i.e., during foraging). Initiators of collective movements grunted more often than followers in the pre‐departure period as well as at individual departure. The latter difference was due to the initiators’ grunt rates increasing earlier than the followers’ and remaining at an elevated level for longer. These observations suggest that grunts serve to coordinate the departure by indicating the individual's readiness to move. The pre‐departure period, in which both initiators and followers showed an elevated grunt rate, may provide the basis for a shared decision on departure time. The difference in initiator and follower call rates suggests that grunts may have a recruitment function, but playback experiments are required to test this potential function. Overall, our study describes how multicontextual close calls can function as movement calls, with changes in call rate providing a potential feedback mechanism for the timing of group movements. This study thus contributes to a more detailed understanding of the mechanisms of group coordination and collective decision‐making.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/eth.12663

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sperber, A. L., Werner, L. M., Kappeler, P. M., & Fichtel, C.
Affiliations
  • German Primate Center (DE)
  • University of Göttingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Sperber, Anna Lucia
Venue
Ethology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-10-12
Volume
123
Issue
12
Pages
894-905
ISSN
  • 0179-1613 (ISSN-L)
  • 1439-0310
OpenAlex
W2762881407
Cited by
39
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ethology (publishedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsches Primatenzentrum
  • Georg-August-Universität Göttingen
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology › Animal Vocal Communication and Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Marine animal studies overview
Keywords
Eulemur rufifrons, grunts, group decision making, departure time choice, call rate, primate vocal communication, Kirindy Forest

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