The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Ecological Model of Female-Bonded Primate Groups
Abstract
1. Multi-female groups of primates fall into two main classes, (a) female-bonded (FB) and (b) non-female-bonded (non-FB). A model is presented to account for the evolution of FB groups in terms of ecological pressures on female relationships. 2. The model suggests that FB groups have evolved as a result of competition for high-quality food patches containing a limited number of feeding sites. Groups are viewed as being based on cooperative relationships among females. These relationships are beneficial because cooperators act together to supplant others from preferred food patches. 3. Ecological data support the model for most FB species, but not for Theropithecus gelada or Colobus guereza, whose foods are not found in high-quality patches with limited feeding sites. Non-FB species conform to expectation, either because they do not use high-quality patches, or because feeding competition has disruptive effects during periods of food scarcity. 4. The behaviour of females differs as expected between FB and non-FB species in group movements and in inter-group interactions; in both contexts females are more involved in FB species. 5. Multi-male groups tend to be found in non-territorial FB species. The presence of several males per group is suggested to benefit females by raising the competitive ability of the group in inter-group interactions. 6. Competitive relationships among females are more strongly marked in FB groups than in non-FB groups. The model suggests that relationships in most FB groups are ultimately related to feeding competition.
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
The genetical evolution of social behaviour. I
Hamilton, W. D. (1964) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 · Cited by 15,725
Strategies in Herbivory by Mammals: The Role of Plant Secondary Compounds
Freeland, W. J., & Janzen, D. H. (1974) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/282907 · Cited by 1,358
Cited by
Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition
Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x05000129 · Cited by 4,882
Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight.
Taylor, S. E., Klein, L. C., Lewis, B. P., Gruenewald, T. L., Gurung, R. A. R., & Updegraff, J. A. (2000) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.107.3.411 · Cited by 3,308
Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates
Dunbar, R. I. M. (1992) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/0047-2484(92)90081-j · Cited by 2,542
Cooperation between non-kin in animal societies
Clutton-Brock, T. (2009) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature08366 · Cited by 951
The Philosophy of Sociality: The Shared Point of View
Tuomela, R. (2007) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195313390.001.0001 · Cited by 840
Metadata
- Authors
- Wrangham, R. W.
- Venue
- Behaviour
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 1980
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 262-300
- ISSN
- 0005-7959 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-539X
- OpenAlex
- W2032093172
- Cited by
- 1,977
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 13.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.