Studies on Cercopithecine primate maternal styles, using factor analysis on a set of maternal behaviors, commonly render two factors that describe separate dimensions of maternal behavior: protectiveness and rejection. The aims of this study were to 1) investigate whether this method for determining maternal styles in Cercopithecine species can be applied to bonobos (Pan paniscus) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), 2) determine whether they follow the same pattern, and 3) assess whether species differences in maternal style are apparent. We performed a factor analysis on nine maternal behaviors using data on eight mother-infant pairs of each species. This resulted in three factors: protectiveness, distance, and refusal. Protectiveness is positively correlated with time spent in ventral contact, making contact, approaching, and restraining. Distance is positively related with breaking contact and leaving. Refusal is positively correlated with rejecting and nipple-rejecting. The pattern of protectiveness corresponds with the pattern found in Cercopithecine species, suggesting a high consistency of this dimension across species and higher taxa. The retention of the other two factors indicates that in the Pan species, breaking contact and leaving represent another dimension, apart from rejecting and nipple-rejecting, which usually fall under one dimension in Cercopithecine species. An interspecific comparison of the factor scores for each dimension of maternal behavior reveals that, on average, bonobos and chimpanzees score equally on protectiveness. Scores on distance increase positively with infant age in chimpanzees, and negatively in bonobos, and on average bonobos have higher scores on refusal. These interspecies differences in maternal style are discussed in the light of interspecies differences in infant development, infant vulnerability to aggression, interbirth intervals, and female sociality.

We investigated intra-and interspecific differences in life history and reproductive parameters in bonobos (Pan paniscus) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). We compare the parameters of wild and captive females in order to shed light on the influence of habitat or specific differences or both on reproduction. We present new and additional information on reproductive parameters from captive bonobos and chimpanzees. Captive chimpanzees birth more live offspring and have a shorter interbirth interval, but experience higher infant mortality than captive bonobos. Although captive bonobo females tend to start reproduction at a younger age than chimpanzees, this is effectively only so for wild-born females of both species. Ultimately both species reach the same rate of production of offspring surviving to 5 yr. These results contrast with data from the wild. Wild bonobos tend to have higher reproductive success, a higher fertility rate and a shorter interbirth interval than wild chimpanzees. Reproduction is similar for wild and captive bonobos, which suggests that they are producing at their maximum under both conditions. Overall captive chimpanzees perform better than their wild conspecifics, probably because of lower feeding competition. Infant survival is the only specific difference not affected by captivity. Bonobo infants survive better, which suggests that chimpanzee infants are more at risk. We argue that the interspecific variation in reproductive parameters in captivity is related to the different influence of captivity on reproduction and different pressures of external sources of infant and juvenile mortality.

The dichotomy between the two Pan species, the bonobo (Pan paniscus) and chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) has been strongly emphasized until very recently. Given that most studies were primarily based on adult individuals, we shifted the "continuity versus discontinuity" discussion to the infant and juvenile stage. Our aim was to test quantitatively, some conflicting statements made in literature considering species differences between immature bonobos and chimpanzees. On one hand it is suggested that infant bonobos show retardation in motor and social development when compared with chimpanzees. Additionally it is expected that the weaning process is more traumatic to chimpanzee than bonobo infants. But on the other hand the development of behaviors is expected to be very similar in both species. We observed eight mother-infant pairs of each species in several European zoos. Our preliminary research partially confirms that immature chimpanzees seem spatially more independent, spending more time at a larger distance from their mother than immature bonobos. However, the other data do not seem to support the hypothesis that bonobo infants show retardation of motor or social development. The development of solitary play, environmental exploration, social play, non-copulatory mounts and aggressive interactions do not differ between the species. Bonobo infants in general even groom other group members more than chimpanzee infants. We also found that older bonobo infants have more nipple contact than same aged chimpanzees and that the weaning process seems to end later for bonobos than for immature chimpanzee. Additionally, although immature bonobos show in general more signs of distress, our data suggest that the weaning period itself is more traumatic for chimpanzees.