| Literature DB >> 34588572 |
Simone Anzà1, Elisa Demuru2,3, Elisabetta Palagi4,5.
Abstract
The Biological Market Theory (BMT) posits that cooperation between non-human animals can be seen as a mutually beneficial exchange of commodities similarly to what observed in human economic markets. Positive social interactions are commodities in non-human animals, and mutual exchanges fulfilling the criteria of the BMT have been shown in several species. However, the study of biological markets suffers from methodological limitations that are mainly linked to the difficulty of clearly identifying the currencies and their exchanges in the short-term. Here, we test whether bonobo females are more attractive during their maximum swelling phase, whether they exchange grooming and Genito-Genital Rubbing (GGR) on a daily level of analysis, and whether these daily exchanges fulfil the BMT criteria. Females engaged more in GGR when their sexual swelling was in the maximum phase. Moreover, they exchanged grooming and sex according to the daily "market fluctuations" associated with swelling status. Females in the minimum phase (low-value) increased their probability to engage in GGR with females in the maximum phase (high-value) by grooming them preferentially. In line with the supply/demand law, the female grooming strategy varied depending on the daily number of swollen females present: the higher the number of swollen females, the lower the individual grooming preference. As a whole, our study confirms BMT as a valid model to explain daily commodity exchanges as a function of the temporary value of traders, and underlines the importance of a day-by-day approach to unveil the presence of a biological market when the value of traders frequently changes.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34588572 PMCID: PMC8481276 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-98894-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Variables in Model 1 explaining the daily grooming preference while controlling for rank and age of both actor and receiver. LTR = likelihood-ratio test.
| Fixed variables | Estimates | SE | Z-value | 2.5% C.I | 97.5% C.I | LRT | df | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1.95 | 0.50 | 3.93 | 0.98 | 2.92 | – | – | – |
| a | ||||||||
| aSwelling act(max) | 0.22 | 0.52 | 0.43 | − 0.80 | 1.24 | – | – | – |
| aSwelling rec(max) | − 0.56 | 0.60 | − 0.94 | − 1.74 | 0.62 | – | – | – |
| bGroup2 | − 0.13 | 0.51 | − 0.25 | − 1.13 | 0.88 | 0.06 | 1 | 0.805 |
| c | 0.06 | 0.22 | 0.29 | − 0.36 | 0.49 | 0.08 | 1 | 0.773 |
| c | 0.47 | 0.28 | 1.69 | − 0.07 | 1.02 | 3.11 | 1 | 0.078 |
| c | − 0.11 | 0.22 | − 0.51 | − 0.54 | 0.31 | 0.24 | 1 | 0.622 |
| c | − 0.23 | 0.24 | − 0.97 | − 0.70 | 0.23 | 0.98 | 1 | 0.322 |
Control variables are in italics and explanatory variables with significant P values are in bold and marked with *
aSwelling condition “min” as reference category.
bGroup1 as reference category.
cz-transformed to a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.
Figure 1Effect of the number of females in maximum swelling phase on daily grooming preference (red solid line) at the average of all other predictors. Gray band indicates 95% Confidence Intervals. Data points are plotted using jitter function at 0.15 (width) to avoid complete overlapping and improve graph interpretability.
Figure 2Predicted effect of the interaction of actor and receiver’s swelling state on the dyadic grooming preference. Dots with borders and whiskers indicate estimated mean and standard errors of categorical responses, while colored lines indicate variation in receiver’s effect according to actor’s swelling. The figure is plotted with all other predictors at their average value. Dots without borders indicate raw data plotted with jitter function at 0.1 (width). Parentheses indicate significant post-hoc comparison.
Variables in Model 2 explaining the occurrence of daily GGR while controlling for rank and age of both actor and receiver.
| Fixed variables | Estimates | SE | Z-value | 2.5% C.I | 97.5% C.I | LRT | df | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1.51 | 0.07 | 21.38 | 1.37 | 1.65 | – | – | – |
| a,b | ||||||||
| a,bGrooming * Swellingact(max) | 0.60 | 0.06 | 9.36 | 0.47 | 0.72 | – | – | – |
| a,bGrooming * Swellingrec(max) | 0.88 | 0.06 | 13.94 | 0.75 | 1.00 | – | – | – |
| a,bSwellingact(max) * Swellingrec(max) | − 0.40 | 0.07 | − 5.77 | − 0.53 | − 0.26 | – | – | – |
| bGrooming | − 0.61 | 0.06 | − 10.48 | − 0.72 | − 0.50 | – | – | – |
| aSwellingact(max) | 0.03 | 0.07 | 0.43 | − 0.10 | 0.16 | – | – | – |
| aSwellingrec(max) | 0.64 | 0.07 | 9.34 | 0.51 | 0.78 | – | – | – |
| bGroup2 | 0.20 | 0.07 | 2.79 | 0.06 | 0.34 | 0.33 | 1 | 0.563 |
| c | 0.37 | 0.05 | 6.84 | 0.26 | 0.47 | |||
| c | − 0.37 | 0.05 | − 6.99 | − 0.47 | − 0.26 | – | – | – |
| c | − 0.51 | 0.06 | − 9.00 | − 0.62 | − 0.40 | – | – | – |
| c | ||||||||
| c | 0.21 | 0.05 | 3.94 | 0.11 | 0.32 | 2.15 | 1 | 0.142 |
LTR likelihood-ratio test.
Control variables are in italics, variables with significant P values are in bold and marked with *. Grooming = daily dyadic grooming preference. Swellingact,rec = sexual swelling condition of actor or receiver.
aDummy coded with “min” swelling condition as reference category.
bDummy coded with Group1 as reference category.
cz-transformed to a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1.
Figure 3Effect of the three-way interaction grooming*swelling*swelling. (a) Indicates actor in the minimum swelling phase when interacting with a receiver in the minimum swelling phase (in blue) or with a receiver in the maximum swelling phase (in red). (b) Indicates actor in the maximum swelling phase when interacting with a receiver in the minimum swelling phase (in yellow) or with a receiver in the maximum swelling phase (in green). Shaded bands indicate 95% Confidence Intervals. Darker points represent overlapping of several data points.