Social organization in a wild population ofCallithrix jacchus: II. Intragroup social behavior

Digby, Leslie J.

doi:10.1007/bf02382859

Cited by 86 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We demonstrate that testicular volume in adult common marmosets does not depend on body mass but instead on reproductive status. In all free-ranging groups researchers have studied to date (Araújo 1996;Arruda et al 2005;Digby 1995;Lazaro-Perea et al 2000), the researchers recorded no copulation between subordinate males and breeding females. However, Arruda et al (2005) noted that subordinate females copulated with extragroup males.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, because males living within the same social group show low-intensity agonistic interactions, they might use other tactics to maintain reproductive exclusivity with breeding females. Some authors have described mate guarding and sperm competition as part of male callitrichid strategy (Digby 1995(Digby , 1999Huck et al 2005). For free-ranging common marmosets, mate-guarding behavior is frequently reported around the postpartum period (Albuquerque et al 2001;Arruda et al 2005Digby 1995Lazaro-Perea 2001), but according to Harcourt et al (1981) and Dixson and Anderson (2004), common testicular size in marmosets does not suggest sperm competition, as expected for a primarily monogamous species.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some authors have described mate guarding and sperm competition as part of male callitrichid strategy (Digby 1995(Digby , 1999Huck et al 2005). For free-ranging common marmosets, mate-guarding behavior is frequently reported around the postpartum period (Albuquerque et al 2001;Arruda et al 2005Digby 1995Lazaro-Perea 2001), but according to Harcourt et al (1981) and Dixson and Anderson (2004), common testicular size in marmosets does not suggest sperm competition, as expected for a primarily monogamous species. Though reproductive males performed different roles within the group, mainly during intergroup encounters (Araújo 1996;Lazaro-Perea 2001;Lazaro-Perea et al 2000), no information is available on testicular size associated to social rank.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even so, in general, affiliative and sexual interactions (Albuquerque et al 2001;Araújo 1996;Digby 1995Digby , 1999Lazaro-Perea 2001) characterize breeding pairs in free-ranging groups. Thus, because males living within the same social group show low-intensity agonistic interactions, they might use other tactics to maintain reproductive exclusivity with breeding females.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Testicular Volume and Reproductive Status of Wild Callithrix jacchus

Araújo

Sousa

2008

Int J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social relationship dynamic among callitrichid females is well known. Breeding exclusivity by dominant females involves female-female competition, usually resulting in the inhibition of subordinate reproduction. However, the strategies to maintain the male breeding position are still unclear. Researchers have observed no overt aggression between males, and differences in testosterone levels between dominant and subordinate individuals do not correlate with differences in reproductive success. In Callithrix monogamy is the predominant mating system, and testicular size is compatible with the absence of sperm competition. We analyzed testicular volume during development in 95 individuals at different ages (infant n= 12, juvenile n=9, subadult n=15, and adult n=59). We also investigated if the ratio between testicular volume and body mass correlates with breeding position in the social group. The ratio was significantly higher in breeding males and a positive correlation between body mass and testicular volume is significant only for nonbreeding males. The findings suggest that testicular size varies with male reproductive status in the social group and that the enlargement of testicular volume in breeding common marmoset males seems to be a result of proximate causes and to depend on social and reproductive contexts acting together or separately.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Testicular Volume and Reproductive Status of Wild Callithrix jacchus

Araújo

Sousa

2008

Int J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Breeders are socially most central, as they are the most frequent grooming partners [6] and in closer proximity to most other group members, compared to adult offspring who often occupy more peripheral positions [5]. The relationships of breeding pairs are relatively well studied and described as socially monogamous [7,8]; but see [9,10], whereas less is known about the relationship structure among other group members in marmoset family groups.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term-stability of relationship structure in family groups of common marmosets, and its link to proactive prosociality

Finkenwirth

Burkart

2017

Physiology & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cooperatively breeding, group-living common marmosets show differentiated relationships, where more strongly bonded dyads within a group engage more in affiliative interactions than less strongly bonded ones. Intriguingly, recent results suggest that strong bonds do not only occur between breeding partners but between individuals from any sex or status, and that strong-bond partners exhibit correlated oxytocin fluctuations (dyadic oxytocin synchrony, OTS) over a period of six weeks. To date, it is unclear whether such relationships are stable over time and whether they are also reflected in higher partner-specific proactive prosociality. To assess the long-term stability of the relationship structure of common marmoset family groups, we investigated whether hormonal and behavioral markers of group structure (dyadic OTS, dyadic affiliation, and individual group integration) in common marmoset families remained stable over a period of six months. We collected baseline urinary OT and social behavior of 36 dyads from three family groups in a non-reproductive period (period A), and again six months later, around the birth of new infants (period B). Patterns of dyadic OTS, dyadic affiliation, and individual group integration were consistent between the two study periods. Oxytocin data from a fourth group (10 dyads), collected in two nonreproductive periods separated by a period of more than five years, could replicate this finding. Furthermore, OTS was also correlated with proactive prosociality that was assessed experimentally for 38 dyads during an earlier study. These results suggest that differentiated relationships are stable over time, even between group members other than the breeding pair, and that more strongly bonded partners also show higher levels of proactive prosociality.Future studies are necessary to identify whether these relationships have an adaptive function, perhaps with regard to positive consequences on cooperativeness.

show abstract

Behavioral and social correlates of escape from suppression of ovulation in female common marmosets housed with the natal family

Saltzman¹,

Severin

Schultz-Darken³

et al. 1997

Am. J. Primatol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although female common marmosets typically do not breed while housed with their natal families, up to half ovulate at least once while housed with the intact natal family, and a similar proportion conceive if an unrelated adult male is present in the group. In this study, we investigated the behavioral and social correlates of escape from suppression of ovulation by daughters housed in intact natal families or in families in which the father had been replaced by an unrelated adult male. Focal-animal behavioral data were collected from daughters that were (N = 7) or were not (N = 10) undergoing ovulatory cycles while housed with the natal family and from daughters that were (N = 5) or were not (N = 3) cycling or pregnant in families containing an unrelated male. Additionally, four cyclic and six acyclic females housed in intact natal families underwent simulated "prospecting" tests. Cyclic and acyclic daughters in intact natal families did not engage in sexual interactions with the father and showed few differences from one another in their interactions with the parents. Moreover, cyclic and acyclic daughters did not differ in their willingness to leave the family for short periods or to investigate an unfamiliar family in "prospecting" tests. However, daughters that underwent ovarian cycles in the presence of an unrelated male showed numerous behavioral differences from those in intact natal families, including frequent courtship and sexual behaviors with the male, reduced affiliative interactions with the mother, and elevated frequencies of aggressive display behavior. Moreover, these females were less likely to behave submissively towards the mother or the adult male. These findings suggest that both suppression of ovulation and inhibition of sexual behavior normally contribute to reproductive failure in female marmosets living with their natal families, and that the two components of suppression may become dissociated under specific social conditions. Am.

show abstract

Social organization in a wild population ofCallithrix jacchus: II. Intragroup social behavior

Cited by 86 publications

References 32 publications

Testicular Volume and Reproductive Status of Wild Callithrix jacchus

Testicular Volume and Reproductive Status of Wild Callithrix jacchus

Long-term-stability of relationship structure in family groups of common marmosets, and its link to proactive prosociality

Behavioral and social correlates of escape from suppression of ovulation in female common marmosets housed with the natal family

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About