One-Male Harems and Female Social Dynamics in Guinea Baboons

Abstract

Little is known about the mating system and social organization of Guinea baboons. This study investigated whether Guinea baboons have a harem-based mating system similar to that of hamadryas and gelada baboons and whether one-male mating units also correspond to social units. Ten adult females in a captive multi-male multi-female group of Guinea baboons were focally observed 2 h per week for 12 weeks, and all observed copulations within the group were recorded. Some males copulated with a single female while others had harems of 2–4 females. All females copulated with a single male except 1 female that switched harems early in the study. The focal females had higher rates of social interaction with their harem members, especially their harem male, than with individuals outside the harem. Females appeared to be subordinate to the harem male but little or no physical aggression or herding behavior from the male was observed. Variation in female social interactions within the harem was not accounted for by their sexual interactions with the male or their genetic relatedness with the females. Females, however, appeared to maintain social relationships with their female relatives in other harems. Taken together, the results of this study show that both mating and affiliative interactions in Guinea baboons are concentrated within one-male units and that the social dynamics within and between these units share some similarities as well as differences with those of hamadryas and gelada baboons.

Charting the neglected West: The social system of Guinea baboons

“…Moreover, a number of authors reported OMU‐like subgroups as the smallest entities (Boese, ; Galat‐Luong et al, ; Sharman, ); however, it remained unclear whether these OMUs represent reproductive units as in hamadryas baboons (Kummer, ). Based on observations collected from captive Guinea baboons, Maestripieri, Mayhew, Carlson, Hoffman, and Radtke () assumed the existence of OMUs, while Sharman () conducted nearest‐neighbor analyses and found that females tended to associate most frequently with juveniles and other females. Sharman considered this to be consistent with the idea of female‐bonded kin groups, as in savanna baboons.…”

Biogeographic variation in the baboon: dissecting the cline

“…While the hamadryas baboon lives in a resource-poor environment (Kummer, 1968;Schreier & Swedell, 2009), the Guinea baboon lives in a very productive environment with high levels of rainfall, primary productivity and fruit abundance (Anderson & McGrew, 1984;Culot, 2003). There are several similarities between the far western and far eastern subspecies: small stature (Fleagle, (Jolly, 1993) and social structure, namely a form of one male group (Galat-Luong et al 2006;Maestripieri et al 2007). It is thus parsimonious to regard these traits as ancestral, retained when baboons radiated into the north-eastern and -western corners of sub-Saharan Africa; the presence of the larger bodied olive baboon midway between the Guinea and hamadryas baboons may well be due to a later expansion of the ancestor of P. h. anubis (Jolly, 2003).…”

Post‐Conflict Non‐Aggressive Behaviours may be neither Friendly nor Conciliatory: Conflict Management of Male Hamadryas Baboons

“…Finally, the relatively high rate of side-directed aggressive interactions initiated by aggressors and victims might also reflect the antagonists' persisting aggressive motivation during post-conflict periods. We believe that for a post-conflict interaction to qualify as a reunion, the Maestripieri et al (2007).…”