A guide to practical babooning: Historical, social, and cognitive contingency

Funding informationVilas Research Professorship, University of Wisconsin-Madison. K E Y W O R D S behavioral flexibility, field primatology, primate behavioral ecology, primate conservation, social evolution 1 | I N TR ODU C TI ON Much has changed in our understanding of primate social behavior since the pioneering naturalistic field study conducted by Clarence Ray Carpenter (1934) on the behavior and social relations of mantled howler monkeys in Panama. These changes reflect a combination of interacting factors, including: (i) shifts in disciplinary perspectives; (ii) advances in theory, methods, and analytical (including computational) power; and (iii) a dramatic increase in the diversity of primate taxa that have been studied across space and over time. Together, these changes have broadened our comparative perspectives about primates, and challenged basic longstanding concepts such as those about the stability of group size and composition, and the role of kinship in structuring primate social relationships. They have also stimulated new considerations of behavioral adaptation, variation, and flexibility (Strier, 2017a). After a remarkable expansion in primate behavioral and ecological studies over the past half-century, we have reached an exciting new threshold of understanding about the range of flexible behavioral patterns that primates exhibit in response to local ecological and demographic conditions. This understanding is poised to lead to the development of new dynamic comparative models that encompass both interspecific and intraspecific variation in primate behavioral ecology, and thus will provide insights into primate social evolution and adaptive potential (Strier, 2017b). At the same time, however, we are facing an impending crisis. Some 60% of primate taxa are already threatened with extinction, and 75% of primate populations are experiencing dangerous declines (Estrada et al., 2017). Accelerating anthropogenic pressures from habitat loss and hunting, coupled with irreversible climate change, extreme weather events, and the spread of zoonotic diseases, are now escalating the risks to primates at local, regional, and global scales. Urgent concerns about the long-term prospects for the survival of primates cast a formidable shadow over what would otherwise be an unguarded optimism about the future of the field.The realities of anthropogenic impacts on primate populations and their habitats, though cause for alarm, have nonetheless led to new insights into the inconsistencies between predictions about behavioral adaptations derived from socioecological theory and the actual behavior patterns we observe (Janson, 2000;Strier, 2003aStrier, , 2003bThierry, 2008;Koenig & Borries, 2009). Indeed, a major challenge in contemporary primate behavioral ecology revolves around identifying whether the behavior patterns that presumably evolved under very different ecological and demographic conditions in the past still continue to be adaptive today. Increasing sensitivities to the altered conditions under which ...

Section: The Presentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primate social behavior

Strier

2018

“…Examples of intraspecific variation range from the social conventions, and in some cases, tool use, peculiar to different groups and populations of species that have been studied and compared across multiple sites (e.g., baboons: Barrett, ; Sapolsky & Share, ; Japanese macaques: Leca, Gunst, & Huffman, ; capuchin monkeys: Perry, ; gorillas: Robbins et al, ; and chimpanzees and orangutans: Koops, Visalberghi, & van Schaik, ; Sanz & Morgan, ), to differences in the size, composition, and social structure of many primates, such as those of red colobus monkey groups living under both similar and different ecological conditions in Kibale National Park and other forests nearby (Chapman and Rothman, ; Struhsaker, ). For other species, however, the primary sources of information about behavioral variation come from long‐term studies of single groups or populations that have documented behavioral changes over time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What does variation in primate behavior mean?

Strier

2017

Interest in intraspecific behavioral variation has grown with concerns about the ability of primates to adapt to the rapidly changing ecological and demographic conditions that threaten their survival. Now, in addition to identifying the causes and phylogenetic distribution of normative, species-specific behavior patterns for interspecific comparisons, there is widespread recognition of the need to incorporate intraspecific variation. This variation is evident across groups and populations of the same species as well over the long histories of single groups of long-lived, socially complex animals with overlapping generations. Yet, analyses of both cross-sectional and longitudinal data require explicit criteria about how to classify and interpret behavioral variation, and must be sensitive to the limitations of space-for-time substitutions in these comparisons. Current approaches have made great advances, but there remains an urgent challenge of understanding intraspecific variation in a way that will facilitate the development of new predictive models to assess population resilience and extinction risks in the face of climate change and other anthropogenic influences.behavioral flexibility, behavioral plasticity, comparative methods, conservation, intraspecific variation

“…Such examples force the conclusion that the apparent simplicity or complexity of a phenotype provides little indication of the complexity of the underlying genetic influences. Further, I would suggest that this notion shares some similarity with the argument put forward by Barrett, Henzi and Rendall (Barrett, ; Barrett, Henzi, & Rendall, ) that the apparent complexity of behaviors observed among primates does not necessarily require that those animals are engaging in complex, internal, and declarative cognitive processes of the sort that humans experience. In parallel with Barrett's () argument for behavior, we should also acknowledge that genotype–phenotype relationships with seemingly complex outcomes (i.e., multi‐faceted changes in behavior resulting from genetic changes) may arise from quite simple underlying cellular mechanisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 54%

The behavioral genetics of nonhuman primates: Status and prospects

Rogers

2018

The complexity and diversity of primate behavior have long attracted the attention of ethologists, psychologists, behavioral ecologists, and neuroscientists. Recent studies have advanced our understanding of the nature of genetic influences on differences in behavior among individuals within species. A number of analyses have focused on the genetic analysis of behavioral reactions to specific experimental tests, providing estimates of the degree of genetic control over reactivity, and beginning to identify the genes involved. Substantial progress is also being made in identifying genetic factors that influence the structure and function of the primate brain. Most of the published studies on these topics have examined either cercopithecines or chimpanzees, though a few studies have addressed these questions in other primate species. One potentially important line of research is beginning to identify the epigenetic processes that influence primate behavior, thus revealing specific cellular and molecular mechanisms by which environmental experiences can influence gene expression or gene function relevant to behavior. This review summarizes many of these studies of non-human primate behavioral genetics. The primary focus is on analyses that address the nature of the genes and genetic processes that affect differences in behavior among individuals within non-human primate species. Analyses of between species differences and potential avenues for future research are also discussed. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/ajpa V C