| Literature DB >> 31840059 |
F M D Paciência1,2, J Rushmore3, I S Chuma4, I F Lipende4, D Caillaud5, S Knauf2,6, D Zinner1,7.
Abstract
Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are ubiquitous within wild animal populations, yet it remains largely unknown whether animals evolved behavioral avoidance mechanisms in response to STI acquisition. We investigated the mating behavior of a wild population of olive baboons (Papio anubis) infected by the bacterium Treponema pallidum. This pathogen causes highly conspicuous genital ulcerations in males and females, which signal infectious individuals. We analyzed data on 876 mating attempts and associated acceptance or rejection responses in a group of about 170 baboons. Our findings indicate that females are more likely to avoid copulation if either the mating partner or females themselves have ulcerated genitals. We suggest that this outcome is linked to the overall higher choosiness and infection-risk susceptibility typically exhibited by females. Our results show that selection pressures imposed by pathogens induce individual behavioral modifications, leading to altered mate choice and could reduce promiscuity in a wild nonhuman primate population.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31840059 PMCID: PMC6892622 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aaw9724
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Adv ISSN: 2375-2548 Impact factor: 14.136
Fig. 1Genital ulcerations caused by Treponema pallidum.
Clinical signs of infection in adult females (top) and males (bottom) of our study group. Photo credit: F. M. D. Paciência, German Primate Center.
Fig. 2Percentage of male and female mating attempts according to their GHS.
Each attempt could result in either copulation (green bar) or avoidance (brown bar). The percentage of observations is shown on the y axis. The attempts between individuals according to their GHS are shown on the x axis. NU × NU (non-ulcerated × non-ulcerated), UL × UL (ulcerated × ulcerated), NUM × ULF (non-ulcerated male × ulcerated female), ULM × NUF (ulcerated male × non-ulcerated female). Sample sizes are shown at the top of each bar.
Fig. 3Olive baboon mating network.
Nodes represent individual baboons and are colored according to each baboon’s GHS. Red nodes represent ulcerated individuals and gray non-ulcerated. Individuals who switched GHS are colored according to the status which had a higher number of copulations. Squares and circles represent males and females, respectively. Edges are weighted by the number of copulations among dyads and respective focal time. Edge colors correspond to the pairwise GHS of the nodes they connect, with red edges representing copulations where at least one of the individuals is ulcerated, while gray edges represent copulations between non-ulcerated individuals.
Total attempt models.
Weibull mixed-effects models evaluating whether the total number of mating attempts is influenced by the dyad’s GHS of the male and/or the female. Mating attempts initiated by males and females are shown in TA-1 and TA-2, respectively. Given are posterior means, SDs, 2.5 and 97.5% confidence intervals (CIs), and effective sample sizes (n). Rhat = 1 (model convergence) for all parameters. Models were run using four chains, each with 2000 iterations, a burn-in of 1000, and thinning set to 1.
| Intercept | −3.40 | 0.24 | −3.89 | −2.94 | 2799 |
| Intercept β | −2.11 | 0.20 | −2.53 | −1.75 | 2550 |
| Main effects: | |||||
| GHS females | 0.04 | 0.28 | −0.52 | 0.59 | 4000 |
| GHS females β | 0.17 | 0.24 | −0.31 | 0.64 | 4000 |
| GHS males | 0.37 | 0.28 | −0.18 | 0.92 | 2942 |
| GHS males β | 0.07 | 0.24 | −0.40 | 0.56 | 3025 |
| Random effects: | |||||
| Male ID | 0.24 | 0.17 | 0.01 | 0.63 | 1803 |
| Male ID β | 0.14 | 0.11 | 0.01 | 0.40 | 2027 |
| Female ID | 0.17 | 0.13 | 0.01 | 0.47 | 2424 |
| Female ID β | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.00 | 0.33 | 4000 |
| Intercept | −3.56 | 0.28 | −4.15 | −3.05 | 4000 |
| Intercept β | −1.32 | 0.25 | −1.80 | −0.83 | 4000 |
| Main effects: | |||||
| GHS females | 0.12 | 0.32 | −0.51 | 0.73 | 4000 |
| GHS females β | 0.50 | 0.34 | −0.18 | 1.17 | 4000 |
| GHS males | −0.21 | 0.35 | −0.92 | 0.44 | 4000 |
| GHS males β | −0.27 | 0.35 | −1.00 | 0.37 | 4000 |
| Random effects: | |||||
| Male ID | 0.43 | 0.27 | 0.02 | 1.02 | 1222 |
| Male ID β | 0.19 | 0.16 | 0.01 | 0.59 | 1982 |
| Female ID | 0.24 | 0.18 | 0.01 | 0.65 | 2192 |
| Female ID β | 0.32 | 0.22 | 0.01 | 0.83 | 1385 |
Successful attempt models.
GLMMs evaluating whether the success of a mating attempt (i.e., likelihood of copulation) is influenced by the dyad’s GHS of the male and/or the female. Mating attempts initiated by males and females are shown in SA-1 and SA-2, respectively. Estimates, SEs, df, and 2.5 and 97.5% confidence intervals are shown for fixed effects. Significant variables (P < 0.05) are shown in bold. Intercept with reference category for non-ulcerated individuals.
| Intercept | 2.371 | 0.477 | 1.628 | 3.326 | * | * | * |
| GHS females | −1.127 | 0.480 | −1.962 | −0.325 | 7.187 | 1 | |
| GHS males | −1.167 | 0.481 | −2.151 | −0.228 | 5.315 | 1 | |
| Intercept | −1.542 | 0.469 | −2.782 | −0.735 | * | * | * |
| GHS females | 0.577 | 0.647 | −0.738 | 1.983 | 0.794 | 1 | 0.373 |
| GHS males | −0.396 | 0.657 | −1.727 | 1.055 | 0.348 | 1 | 0.555 |
*Not shown due to very limited interpretation