The evolution of marsupial social organization

Qiu, J.; Olivier, Charlotte‐Anaïs; Jaeggi, Adrian V.; Schradin, Carsten

doi:10.1098/rspb.2022.1589

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Intraspecific variation in primate social systems recently received more attention ( 8 , 22 – 24 ). Kappeler and Pozzi ( 1 ) already considered IVSO in understanding primate social organization, but their statistical analysis used IVSO as one possible category and not as a continuous variable [as did several other studies on different mammalian taxa ( 34 – 37 )].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primate social organization evolved from a flexible pair-living ancestor

Olivier,

Martin,

Pilisi

et al. 2023

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Explaining the evolution of primate social organization has been fundamental to understand human sociality and social evolution more broadly. It has often been suggested that the ancestor of all primates was solitary and that other forms of social organization evolved later, with transitions being driven by various life history traits and ecological factors. However, recent research showed that many understudied primate species previously assumed to be solitary actually live in pairs, and intraspecific variation in social organization is common. We built a detailed database from primary field studies quantifying the number of social units expressing different social organizations in each population. We used Bayesian phylogenetic models to infer the probability of each social organization, conditional on several socioecological and life history predictors. Here, we show that when intraspecific variation is accounted for, the ancestral social organization of primates was inferred to be variable, with the most common social organization being pair-living but with approximately 10 to 20% of social units of the ancestral population deviating from this pattern by being solitary living. Body size and activity patterns had large effects on transitions between types of social organizations. As in other mammalian clades, pair-living is closely linked to small body size and likely more common in ancestral species. Our results challenge the assumption that ancestral primates were solitary and that pair-living evolved afterward emphasizing the importance of focusing on field data and accounting for intraspecific variation, providing a flexible statistical framework for doing so.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primate social organization evolved from a flexible pair-living ancestor

Olivier,

Martin,

Pilisi

et al. 2023

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Eulipotyphla it was suggested that the ancestor might have been pair living (Valomy et al, 2015). Comparative studies using modern Bayesian statistics and databases based on field studies found pair living to be the most likely ancestral form of social organization in marsupials (Qiu et al, 2022), artiodactyla (Jaeggi et al, 2020), (Olivier, 2023). Given are total number of species and in brackets the percentage of solitary species relative to all species studied.…”

Section: Evidence From Recent Comparative Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, one can differentiate between species that are obligately solitary living (all individuals are solitary), mainly solitary living (most individuals are solitary living) and facultatively solitary living (most individuals live in pairs or groups and less than 50% solitary). Considering such variation is important in comparative studies about social evolution and can challenge previous studies that ignored variation (Dalerum, 2007; Griesser & Suzuki, 2016; Olivier et al., 2024; Qiu et al., 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs and benefits of solitary living in mammals

Makuya,

Schradin

2024

Journal of Zoology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While for decades behavioural ecologists have studied the costs and benefits of group living, solitary living has received little attention. Instead, it was assumed to be the default stage from which sociality evolved. Mammals underwent around 200 million years of social evolution, with a few species evolving communal or cooperative breeding in harsh environments. Other mammal species are successful with solitary living in exactly the same and many other environments, indicating that solitary living is beneficial under many environmental conditions. Comparative studies on mammals indicate that solitary living might not be the ancestral but a derived state. Solitary living in mammals is less common than previously believed, occurring in 22% of the studied species. Here, we review costs and benefits of solitary living in mammals. We found very few studies that considered solitary living and show important future avenues of research based on the factors that are important for the evolution of group living. We also emphasize that a solitary form of social organization does not imply an unsocial lifestyle: solitary mammals typically have non‐random but individualized social interactions with their neighbours, indicating important social structure.

show abstract

“…However, recent comparative studies have shown that this is often not the case [6, 7]. These studies showed that pair-living was most likely the ancestral form of social organisation in artiodactyls [8], primates [9], and possibly in marsupials [10] and Eulipotyphla [11], indicating that solitary living is often a derived state [12]. However, we know little about the mechanisms leading to solitary living in mammals [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tolerant mothers: aggression does not explain solitary living in the bush Karoo rat

Makuya,

Pillay,

Sangweni

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many mammal species are thought to adopt solitary living due to mothers becoming intolerant of their adult offspring as well as social intolerance between adults. However, field studies on how solitary mammals interact are rare. Here we show that solitary living can occur without social intolerance. Over three years, we recorded interactions between free living bush Karoo rats (Otomys unisulcatus) and conducted dyadic encounter experiments between kin and non-kin female neighbours, both in a neutral test arena and in field intruder experiments. Social interactions were rare (N=230 in N=2062 observations), and, when observed, were aggressive in only 34% of the cases. In dyadic encounters, mothers interacted amicably with young offspring. Aggression between mothers and offspring was almost absent. This mother-offspring relationship remained amicable even after the offspring had dispersed. Aggression between neighbouring adult females was low in neutral arena tests, independent of kinship and season. However, in the field, females reacted more aggressively towards non-kin than kin intruders, especially during the breeding season. Tolerance between mothers and adult offspring indicates that aggression is not the mechanism leading to natal dispersal and solitary living. We found a solitary social system characterised by social tolerance, suggesting that dispersal in combination with a lack of social attraction rather than aggression can lead to solitary living.

show abstract

The evolution of marsupial social organization

Cited by 7 publications

References 52 publications

Primate social organization evolved from a flexible pair-living ancestor

Primate social organization evolved from a flexible pair-living ancestor

Costs and benefits of solitary living in mammals

Tolerant mothers: aggression does not explain solitary living in the bush Karoo rat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About