Mating patterns, societies and the ecogeography of macaques

Caldecott, Julian

doi:10.1016/0003-3472(86)90025-4

Cited by 105 publications

(80 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Though there is no evidence to indicate a lesser extent of terrestrialism for M. fuscata compared to the other two species (e.g., Hayama et at., 1994), male intrasexual selection may be more relaxed in M. fuscata than in the other two species. Among the three species, the lowest value of socionomic sex ratio is reported for M. fuscata (Caldecott, 1986), though the reliability of the sex ratio as an index of inter-male competition has been questioned (Glutton-Brock et al, 1977). That the sexual dimorphism in canine height is also milder in M. fuscata than in the other two species (personal observation) also suggests relaxed inter-male competition and predation pressure for M. fuscata.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multivariate Cranial Ontogenetic Allometries in Crab-eating, Rhesus and Japanese Macaques.

Mouri

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multivariate Cranial Ontogenetic Allometries in Crab-eating, Rhesus and Japanese Macaques.

Mouri

1996

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A more exacting ecology of breeding patterns is offered by Caldecott (1984Caldecott ( , 1986aCaldecott ( , 1986b in his study of macaque monkeys. Dividing macaques species into two groups, Caldecott (1986a) found that the availability of food in the environment is related to the degree of inbreeding.…”

Section: Discussion: the Ecology Of Mating Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dividing macaques species into two groups, Caldecott (1986a) found that the availability of food in the environment is related to the degree of inbreeding. Where food is scarce in the environment females compete with males for limited food resources.…”

Section: Discussion: the Ecology Of Mating Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because there is no competition among males for mates, males do not leave the group, which results in an inbred population. Keeping males in the foraging group also provides greater protection against predators and increases what Caldecott (1986aCaldecott ( , 1986b) calls "paternalism"-because all the males of the group are highly related to all other members of the troop, adult males spend a great deal of their time caring for the young.…”

Section: Discussion: the Ecology Of Mating Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tylor vs. Westermarck: Explaining the Incest Taboo

Leavitt¹

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the late 19th century arguments explaining incest avoidance were framed separately by Edward Tylor and Edward Westermarck. Tylor offered an environmental theory asserting that people have to marry outside of their own kin and communities or die out from the detrimental effects of isolation. Westermarck turned to Darwin's theory to explain that harmful inbreeding had been selected against in the human genome. By the late 20th and early 21st centuries explanations of human behaviors have become increasingly encompassed by natural selection theory. The debate concerning the productiveness of evolutionary biology for explaining complex human behaviors is highly contentious and continues unabated. Although human evolutionists repeatedly say that environment is important for understanding human behavior they often do not develop this part of the equation. Behind the prestige of evolutionary biology selection models of human behavior have passed into popular science and the public psyche. Often heard today from a wide range of highly visible media sources is an assortment of topics on human behaviors which are framed by Darwinian assumptions. Contemplations about incest and inbreeding avoidance fall into this category and are presented by Darwinian social science as the best case example demonstrating evolutionary suppositions about human behavior. In the article that follows these issues are framed and examined. The argument is offered that evolutionary approaches are not always the most compelling and that convincing environmental explanations are overlooked.

show abstract

“…黑白仰鼻猴 (Rhinopithecus bieti, 俗名滇金丝猴) 隶属于灵长目猴科 (Cercopithecidae) 疣猴亚科 (Colobinae)仰鼻猴属 (Rhinopithecus), 是中国 I 级、特有珍稀濒危灵长类, 也是世界上分布海拔最高的非人灵长类之一。该物种仅分布于金沙江和澜沧江间的狭窄区域 (E98°37′～99°41′; N26°14′～29°20′), 由南到北依次隶属于行政区划上的云南省云龙、兰坪、丽江、维西、德钦及西藏芒康等 6 个县 (Long e t a l , 1 9 9 4 ) 。现存约 1 3 群 , 1 5 0 0 ～ 1 700 只 (Xiao et al, 2003)。猴群栖息地海拔由北到南逐渐降低, 生境类型由以针叶树为主的暗针叶林渐变为针阔混交林, 其主食由松萝 (Kirkpatrick et al, 1998) 渐变为阔叶 (Ding & Zhao, 2004) 和竹叶 (Yang & Zhao, 2001)。黑白仰鼻猴的社会由多个一雄多雌单元 (one-male multiple-female unit: OMU) 和全雄单元 (all-male unit: AMU) 构成 (Cui et al, 2008;Kirkpatrick & Grueter, 2010;Kirkpatrick et al, 1998, Huang et al, 2012。灵长类交配模式二分为单次爬跨射精 (single mount-to-ejaculation: SME) (Caldecott, 1986;Macaca spp: Fooden, 1980; N. larvatus: Yeager, 1990) 和多次爬跨射精 (multiple mount-to-ejaculation: MME) (C. badius 和 C. guereza : Struhsaker, 1975) 或两者兼有 (Caldecott, 1986;Macaca spp: Fooden, 1980;P. entellus : Hrdy, 1977;R. roxellana: Ren et al, 1995)。笼养黑白仰鼻猴交配模式的主体为 MME 或处于从 SME 到 MME 交配模式连续谱的上段 (Cui et al, 2006)。尽管基于野生猴群的部分数据推测其交配模式为 SME (n=11, Kirkpatrick et al, 1998), 或是 SME 和 MME 并存 (n=8, Xiang & Sayers, 2009) Borries & Koenig, 2008;R.…”

unclassified