Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 360

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Communicative Repertoire of Captive Bonobos (Pan Paniscus), Compared To That of Chimpanzees

De Waal, Frans B.M.·1988·Behaviour

Abstract

Ten bonobos (Pan paniscus), housed in three separate subgroups at the San Diego Zoological Garden, were observed for 288 hours over a four-month period. The colony included one adult male, two adult females, two adolescent males, four juveniles, and one infant. Data on 5,135 sequences of social behavior were collected either as spoken accounts or as video recordings. In addition, high-quality sound recordings were obtained for spectrographic analysis. The data were subjected to a quantitative analysis of probabilities of association between 44 communicative behavior patterns and 40 different context types. The paper treats each communicative behavior pattern separately, providing a) its frequency, b) the most common inter-individual directions of performance, c) characteristic contexts, d) a description, e) a commentary on its possible functions, and 1) a comparison with the behavior of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). The study shows that, while the behavioral repertoires of the two Pan species are fundamentally similar, interesting differences exist in their vocal repertoires, sexual behavior, and agonistic behavior. The bonobo's voice has a higher pitch, and many of its vocalizations are structurally different from homologous chimpanzee vocalizations. The greatest difference concerns the long-distance hooting calls of the two species. The bonobo's sexual behavior is much more elaborate than the chimpanzee's, including ventro-ventral copulation, and "GG-rubbing" between adult females. Sexual forms of contact seem to serve many of the reassurance and reconciliation functions fulfilled by nongenital contact forms in the chimpanzee. Finally, the bonobo's agonistic behavior is less elaborate and appears more controlled than the chimpanzee's.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/156853988x00269

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 360

Metadata

Authors
De Waal, F. B. M.
Venue
Behaviour
Published
1988
Volume
106
Issue
3-4
Pages
183-251
ISSN
  • 0005-7959 (ISSN-L)
  • 1568-539X
OpenAlex
W2014497225
Cited by
360
References
0
FWCI
4.44
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Communicative Repertoire of Captive Bonobos (Pan Paniscus), Compared To That of Chimpanzees. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/156853988x00269
The paper
De Waal, F. B. M. (1988). The Communicative Repertoire of Captive Bonobos (Pan Paniscus), Compared To That of Chimpanzees. Behaviour. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853988x00269

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.