• Long-term patterns of sleeping site use in wild saddleback (Saguinus fuscicollis) and moustached tamarins (S. mystax): effects of foraging, thermoregulation, predation, and resource defense constraints

      Smith, Andrew C.; Knogge, Christoph; Huck, Maren; Löttker, Petra; Buchanan-Smith, Hannah M.; Heymann, Eckhard W.; German Primate Centre, Göttingen; University of Sussex; Anglia Ruskin University; Umweltforschungszentrum Leipzig-Halle; et al. (2007)
      Sleeping sites are an important aspect of an animal’s ecology given the length of time that they spend in them. The sleep ecology of wild saddleback and mustached tamarins is examined using a long-term data set covering three mixed-species troops and 1,3001 tamarin nights. Seasonal changes in photoperiod accounted for a significant amount of variation in sleeping site entry and exit times. Time of exit was more closely correlated with sunrise than time of entry was with sunset. Both species entered their sleeping sites when light levels were significantly higher than when they left them in the morning. Troops of both species used >80 individual sites, the majority being used once. Mustached tamarins never used the same site for more than two consecutive nights, but addlebacks reused the same site for up to four consecutive nights. mustached tamarins slept at significantly greater heights than saddleback tamarins. There were consistent interspecific differences in the types of sites used. Neither the presence of infants, season, nor rainfall affected the types or heights of sites chosen. Sleeping sites were located in the central area of exclusive use more often than expected, and their position with respect to fruiting trees indicated a strategy closer to that of a multiple central place forager than a central place forager. These findings are discussed in light of species ecology, with particular reference to predation risk, which is indicated as the major factor influencing the pattern of sleeping site use in these species.
    • Of apples and oranges? The evolution of “monogamy” in non-human primates

      Huck, Maren; Di Fore, Anthony; Fernandez-Duque, Eduardo; University of Derby, Environmental Sustainability Research Centre; University of Texas at Austin; Yale University (Frontiers, 2020-01-10)
      Behavioral ecologists, evolutionary biologists, and anthropologists have been long fascinated by the existence of “monogamy” in the animal kingdom. Multiple studies have explored the factors underlying its evolution and maintenance, sometimes with contradicting and contentious conclusions. These studies have been plagued by a persistent use of fuzzy terminology that often leads to researchers comparing “apples with oranges” (e.g., comparing a grouping pattern or social organization with a sexual or genetic mating system). In this review, we provide an overview of research on “monogamy” in mammals generally and primates in particular, and we discuss a number of problems that complicate comparative attempts to understand this issue. We first highlight why the muddled terminology has hindered our understanding of both a rare social organization and a rare mating system. Then, following a short overview of the main hypotheses explaining the evolution of pair-living and sexualmonogamy, we critically discuss various claims about the principal drivers of “monogamy” that have been made in several recent comparative studies.We stress the importance of using only high quality and comparable data. We then propose that a productive way to frame and dissect the different components of pair-living and sexual or genetic monogamy is by considering the behavioral and evolutionary implications of those components from the perspectives of all participants in a species’ social system. In particular, we highlight the importance of integrating the perspective of “floater” individuals and considering their impacts on local operational sex ratios, competition, and variance in reproductive success across a population. We stress that pair-living need not imply a reduced importance of intrasexual mate competition, a situation that may have implications for the sexual selection potential that have not yet been fully explored. Finally, we note that there is no reason to assume that different taxa and lineages, even within the same radiation, should follow the same pathway to or share a unifying evolutionary explanation for “monogamy”. The study of the evolution of pair-living, sexual monogamy, and genetic monogamy remains a challenging and exciting area of research.