Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes. Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes. Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes. Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives book. Happy reading Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes. Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes. Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes. Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives Pocket Guide.

However, in her study of mountain gorillas in the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda, Robbins notes that when gorillas used fruit resources, it was typical for only some members of the group to climb into the fruit tree, effectively fissioning the group for foraging purposes. Fruit-feeding was associated with both scramble and contest competition among females. And, like other ape species, subtle but linear female dominance hierarchies that sometimes influenced feeding success persisted in an environment of low aggressive intensity.

How similar are these patterns of affiliation and competition to human behavior? Benenson et al. Human females also show tendencies to withdraw from group situations Benenson and Heath, , avoid direct competition when possible Campbell , maintain a small number of close friendships rather than wide social networks Geary et al.

When faced with a group task, young boys had a greater tendency to simulate or engage in one-on-one aggressive conflicts, while young girls consistently formed coalitions to ostracize one group member. Curiously, the girls who attempted to exclude others had higher cortisol than that of their victims, suggesting a cost to this form of competitive behavior. In some ways, the collective studies bear out previous generalizations about ape female relationships: female affiliation rates were low and females generally avoided aggressive conflict.

However, females had differentiated relationships and appeared to be able to take advantage of them under certain circumstances. Stable dominance relationships existed even under conditions of infrequent contact and were relevant to sporadic challenges for long-term resource access. Female apes also formed affiliative relationships, though only with a small number of partners. Further research on the origin and function of these relationships is needed to determine whether they are mere coincidences of space use or whether they are related to the use of overlapping core areas and the need to defend them.

Three studies Benenson et al. While females in adjacent or overlapping foraging ranges may be in the most direct conflict, they may also be the most valuable allies in conflicts with third parties. Thus, as well as accounting for why substantive female-female interactions are rare in apes, future socioecological models need to include the significant role of long-term resource competition in the formation of complex relationships even without the benefits of kin selection. The following studies emphasize that behavioral strategies can be consistent and yet subtle. Understanding variation in mating patterns has necessitated quantification of underlying hormonal variation.

Female dominance and competition may only be expressed periodically, but can have critical influences on female behavior. The papers clearly demonstrate that female apes often face conflicting pressures. The desirability of choosing a high-quality mate is opposed to the need to mate with many males to confuse paternity. The importance of gaining long-term access to food resources must be weighed against the costs of competing directly for them. Nonetheless, female apes have sophisticated, subtle, and often unexpected, mechanisms for negotiating these conflicting demands.

References Benenson, J. Boys withdraw more in one-on-one interactions whereas girls withdraw more in groups. Developmental Psychology, 42, — Medline. Benenson, J. Human sex differences in the use of social ostracism as a competitive tactic. International Journal of Primatology, 29, —, this issue.

Campbell, A. Staying alive: evolution, culture, and women's intra-sexual aggression. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, — Medline. Female competition: causes, constraints, content, and contexts. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 16—26 Medline. Chapman, T. Sexual conflict.

Background

Darwin, C. Emery Thompson, M. Core area quality is associated with variance in reproductive success among female chimpanzees at Kanyawara, Kibale National Park. Animal Behaviour, 73, — Male mating interest varies with female fecundity in Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii of Kanyawara, Kibale National Park. Emlen, S. Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems.

Science, , — Medline. Fawcett, K. Female reproductive behavior in multi-male groups of mountain gorillas, Gorilla beringei beringei , Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda [abstract ]. International Journal of Primatology, 27, Supplement 1. Food availability, female association patterns and dominance relationships in a community of chimpanzees, Budongo Forest, Uganda [abstract ]. Geary, D.

Description

Developmental Review, 23, — Goodall, J. Mother-offspring relationships in free-ranging chimpanzees. Morris Ed.

Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Galdikas, B. Orangutan reproduction in the wild. Graham Ed. New York: Academic Press. Hrdy, S. The woman that never evolved. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Kahlenberg, S. E, Wrangham, R. Kappeler, P. Sexual selection in primates: New and comparative perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CARTA 10th Anniversary Symposium: Schoeninger, Stone, Tishkoff

Female-female competition in Bornean orangutans. Kokko, H. While female gorillas may not be able to avoid competitors as effectively, their diet might be thought to limit the intensity and potential benefits of feeding competition. However, in her study of mountain gorillas in the Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda, Robbins notes that when gorillas used fruit resources, it was typical for only some members of the group to climb into the fruit tree, effectively fissioning the group for foraging purposes.

Fruit-feeding was associated with both scramble and contest competition among females. And, like other ape species, subtle but linear female dominance hierarchies that sometimes influenced feeding success persisted in an environment of low aggressive intensity. How similar are these patterns of affiliation and competition to human behavior? Benenson et al. Human females also show tendencies to withdraw from group situations Benenson and Heath, , avoid direct competition when possible Campbell , maintain a small number of close friendships rather than wide social networks Geary et al.

When faced with a group task, young boys had a greater tendency to simulate or engage in one-on-one aggressive conflicts, while young girls consistently formed coalitions to ostracize one group member. Curiously, the girls who attempted to exclude others had higher cortisol than that of their victims, suggesting a cost to this form of competitive behavior. In some ways, the collective studies bear out previous generalizations about ape female relationships: female affiliation rates were low and females generally avoided aggressive conflict. However, females had differentiated relationships and appeared to be able to take advantage of them under certain circumstances.

Stable dominance relationships existed even under conditions of infrequent contact and were relevant to sporadic challenges for long-term resource access. Female apes also formed affiliative relationships, though only with a small number of partners. Further research on the origin and function of these relationships is needed to determine whether they are mere coincidences of space use or whether they are related to the use of overlapping core areas and the need to defend them. Three studies Benenson et al.

CSIRO PUBLISHING | Reproduction, Fertility and Development

While females in adjacent or overlapping foraging ranges may be in the most direct conflict, they may also be the most valuable allies in conflicts with third parties. Thus, as well as accounting for why substantive female-female interactions are rare in apes, future socioecological models need to include the significant role of long-term resource competition in the formation of complex relationships even without the benefits of kin selection.

The following studies emphasize that behavioral strategies can be consistent and yet subtle. Understanding variation in mating patterns has necessitated quantification of underlying hormonal variation. Female dominance and competition may only be expressed periodically, but can have critical influences on female behavior.

The papers clearly demonstrate that female apes often face conflicting pressures. The desirability of choosing a high-quality mate is opposed to the need to mate with many males to confuse paternity. The importance of gaining long-term access to food resources must be weighed against the costs of competing directly for them. Nonetheless, female apes have sophisticated, subtle, and often unexpected, mechanisms for negotiating these conflicting demands. References Benenson, J. Boys withdraw more in one-on-one interactions whereas girls withdraw more in groups.

Developmental Psychology, 42, — Medline. Benenson, J. Human sex differences in the use of social ostracism as a competitive tactic. International Journal of Primatology, 29, —, this issue. Campbell, A. Staying alive: evolution, culture, and women's intra-sexual aggression. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, — Medline. Female competition: causes, constraints, content, and contexts. Journal of Sex Research, 41, 16—26 Medline. Chapman, T. Sexual conflict. Darwin, C. Emery Thompson, M. Core area quality is associated with variance in reproductive success among female chimpanzees at Kanyawara, Kibale National Park.

Animal Behaviour, 73, — Male mating interest varies with female fecundity in Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii of Kanyawara, Kibale National Park. Emlen, S.

Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives

Ecology, sexual selection, and the evolution of mating systems. Science, , — Medline. Fawcett, K. Female reproductive behavior in multi-male groups of mountain gorillas, Gorilla beringei beringei , Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda [abstract ]. International Journal of Primatology, 27, Supplement 1. Food availability, female association patterns and dominance relationships in a community of chimpanzees, Budongo Forest, Uganda [abstract ]. Geary, D. Developmental Review, 23, — Goodall, J.

Mother-offspring relationships in free-ranging chimpanzees. Morris Ed.


  • IL-1b?
  • Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes - 1st Edition.
  • A Complete Classification of the Isolated Singularities for Nonlinear Elliptic Equations With Inverse Square Potentials!
  • CNA - 一种胰岛素结构模型教具 - Google Patents;
  • Do More Better: A Practical Guide to Productivity;
  • Socialising the Child in Late Medieval England c. 1400–1600.
  • Reproductive Biology of the Great Apes: Comparative and Biomedical Perspectives.

Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. Galdikas, B. Orangutan reproduction in the wild. Graham Ed. New York: Academic Press. Hrdy, S. The woman that never evolved. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Kahlenberg, S. E, Wrangham, R. Kappeler, P. Sexual selection in primates: New and comparative perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Female-female competition in Bornean orangutans. Jersey Wildl. Trust , pp. Google Scholar. Dahl, J. Fox, H. Galdikas, B. Graham , New York, Academic Press.

Harcourt, A. Heape, W. Heinrichs, W. Lippert, W. MacKinnon, J. Oryx — Maple, T. Markham, R. Mitani, J. Nadler, R. Junk Publ. Itoigawa, Y. Sugiyama, G. Sackett, R.

admin