| Literature DB >> 36077958 |
Shohei Shibata1,2, Takeshi Furuichi1, Chie Hashimoto1.
Abstract
Several studies have examined factors that regulate fission-fusion dynamics (FFD) in chimpanzee communities, such as receptive females, predation risks, and food availability. However, the effects of these factors vary between populations. In this study, we conducted focal animal observations of adult males in the M group in Kalinzu to examine the influence of male dominance rank, aggression from other males, the presence of females exhibiting maximum sexual swelling (MS), and fruit abundance on male tendencies of party attendance. We found that low-ranking males spent more time alone than other males when females with MS were absent. In contrast, when females with MS were present, males of all ranks showed a similar tendency of party attendance. We also found that the aggressive interactions increased with the number of males irrespective of the presence or absence of females with MS, and low-ranking males attracted aggression more frequently than higher-ranking males. These results suggest that low-ranking males frequently ranged alone to avoid aggression from other males unless they attended parties to seek mating opportunities. We conclude that low-ranking males have alternative tactics to balance the costs and benefits incurred or gained when attending parties.Entities:
Keywords: Kalinzu Forest Reserve; Pan troglodytes; aggression; dominance rank; fission-fusion dynamics; party size
Year: 2022 PMID: 36077958 PMCID: PMC9454419 DOI: 10.3390/ani12172240
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 3.231
Study subjects, dominance rank, birth year, age category, and the number of observation hour units (OHU).
| Name (Abbreviation) | Dominance Rank | Birth Year | Age Class | OHU |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goku (GK) | Alpha | 1993 * | Prime | 90 |
| Ponta (PO) | High | 1995 * | Prime | 53 |
| Ichiro (IC) | High | 1980s * | Old | 76 |
| Buru (BR) | High | 1970s * | Old | 65 |
| Prince (PR) | Middle | 1997 * | Prime | 59 |
| Taiki (TK) | Middle | 1999 | Young | 77 |
| Deo (DO) | Middle | 1970s * | Old | 62 |
| Pietan (PT) | Low | 2001 | Young | 65 |
| Black (BL) | Low | 1998 * | Young | 72 |
| Jo (JO) | Low | 2000 * | Young | 58 |
* age estimated.
Results of GLMM analysis with males’ tendency of ranging alone compared to attending parties as the dependent variable.
| Variable Statistics | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor Variables | Estimate | SE | z Value | Random Effects | Variance | |
| Intercept | −0.61791 | 0.27047 | −2.285 | 0.022 * | Subjects | 0.096 |
| Rank: Low vs. High | −1.63861 | 0.46026 | −3.560 | <0.001 *** | ||
| Rank: Low vs. Middle | −2.13921 | 0.60170 | −3.555 | <0.001 *** | ||
| MS: absence vs. presence | −1.84479 | 0.44766 | −4.121 | <0.001 *** | ||
| FAI | 0.14836 | 0.08311 | 1.785 | 0.074. | ||
* and *** indicate the significance at p = 0.05 and 0.001 levels, respectively.
Results of GLMM analysis with the number of males in the party that the focal male attended as the dependent variable.
| Variable Statistics | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor Variables | Estimate | SE | z Value | Random Effects | Variance | |
| Intercept | 1.8417 | 0.0587 | 31.394 | <0.001 *** | Subjects | 0.006 |
| Rank: Low vs. High | 0.1348 | 0.0660 | 2.043 | 0.041 * | ||
| Rank: Low vs. Middle | 0.1444 | 0.0693 | 2.082 | 0.037 * | ||
| FAI | −0.0488 | 0.0080 | −6.091 | <0.001 *** | ||
| MS: absence vs. presence | 0.2723 | 0.0673 | 4.048 | <0.001 *** | ||
| Low vs. High: MS | −0.1928 | 0.0845 | −2.282 | 0.022 * | ||
* and *** indicate the significance at p = 0.05 and 0.001 levels, respectively.
Results of GLMM analysis with the number of males in the party that the focal male attended in the absence of females with MS as the dependent variable.
| Variable Statistics | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor Variables | Estimate | SE | z Value | Random Effects | Variance | |
| Intercept | 1.7930 | 0.0688 | 26.068 | <0.001 *** | Subjects | 0.002 |
| Rank: Low vs. High | 0.1367 | 0.0660 | 2.071 | 0.038 * | ||
| Rank: Low vs. Middle | 0.1493 | 0.0694 | 2.150 | 0.031 * | ||
| FAI | −0.0349 | 0.0129 | −2.717 | 0.007 ** | ||
*, **, and *** indicate the significance at p = 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001 levels, respectively.
Results of GLMM analysis with the number of males in the party that the focal male attended in the presence of females with MS as the dependent variable.
| Variable Statistics | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor Variables | Estimate | SE | z Value | Random Effects | Variance | |
| Intercept | 2.1468 | 0.0636 | 33.730 | <0.001 *** | Subjects | 0.004 |
| Rank: Low vs. High | −0.0671 | 0.0675 | −0.993 | 0.321 | ||
| Rank: Low vs. Middle | 0.0267 | 0.0719 | 0.371 | 0.711 | ||
| FAI | −0.0578 | 0.0104 | −5.553 | <0.001 *** | ||
*** indicates the significance at p = 0.001 level.
Figure 1Participation ratio of males in relation to dominance rank on days when females with maximum sexual swelling (MS) were absent and on days when females with MS were present.
Results of GLMM analysis with the number of aggression that males received as the dependent variable.
| Variable Statistics | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Predictor Variables | Estimate | SE | z Value | Random Effects | Variance | |
| Intercept | −4.5668 | 1.0009 | −4.563 | <0.001 *** | Subjects | 0.005 |
| Number of males | 0.20789 | 0.0860 | 2.420 | 0.016 * | ||
| Rank: Low vs. High | −1.60612 | 0.7848 | −2.047 | 0.041 * | ||
| Rank: Low vs. Middle | −0.52884 | 0.5923 | −0.893 | 0.372 | ||
| MS: absence vs. presence | 0.68867 | 0.5837 | 1.180 | 0.238 | ||
* and *** indicate the significance at p = 0.05 and 0.001 levels, respectively.
Figure 2Frequency of aggression males received and the number of males in the party in the absence/presence of females with MS.