Primates

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 539–542

Allogrooming as mutualism in diurnal lemurs

  • R. A. Barton
Short Communication

Abstract

Recent work on allogrooming in Primates has demonstrated the value of considering both its physical and its social aspects. Most studies have been conducted on anthropoid primates only. Here, the grooming interactions of anthropoids and those of diurnal lemurs are contrasted, with special reference to their mutuality. It is shown that lemur grooming appears more intimate and has a far greater component of mutuality than is the case among anthropoids. It is argued that the latter finding reflects a difference between the two taxa in the forms of their agonistic interactions: in anthropoid primates, grooming is thought to be related to patterns of agonistic support in triadic interactions, while in lemurs, agonistic interactions are dyadic and allogrooming is more directly reciprocal.

Key Words

Allogrooming Mutualism Lemurs Anthropoids 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barton, R. A., 1983. A comparative study of grooming interactions in primates.Dodo, J. Jersey Wildl. Preserv. Trust, 20: 26–36.Google Scholar
  2. , 1985. Grooming site preferences in primates and their functional implications.Int. J. Primatol., 6: 519–531.Google Scholar
  3. Boccia, M. L., 1983. A functional analysis of social grooming patterns through direct comparison with self-grooming in rhesus monkeys.Int. J. Primatol., 4: 399–418.Google Scholar
  4. ,B. Rockwood, &M. Novak, 1900. The influence of behavioural context and social characteristics on the physical aspects of social grooming in rhesus monkeys.Int. J. Primatol., 3: 91–108.Google Scholar
  5. de Waal, F. B. M., 1982.Chimpanzee Politics. Jonathan Cape, London.Google Scholar
  6. Doyle, G. A., 1974. Behaviour of prosimians. In:Behaviour of Non-human Primates,A. M. Schrier &F. Stollnitz (eds.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 153–353.Google Scholar
  7. Goosen, C., 1980. After-effects of allogrooming on proximity and locomotion in pairs of stumptailed macaques.Behaviour, 74: 80–104.Google Scholar
  8. Hutchins, M. &D. Barash, 1976. Grooming in primates: Implications for its utilitarian function.Primates, 17: 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jolly, A., 1966a.Lemur Behaviour. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  10. , 1966b. Lemur social behaviour and primate intelligence.Science, 153: 501–506.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Krebs, J. R., 1978. Optimal foraging: Decision rules for predators. In:Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach,J. R. Krebs &N. B. Davies (eds.), Blackwell Scientific Pub., Oxford, pp. 23–63.Google Scholar
  12. Lindburg, D., 1973. Grooming behaviour as a regulator of social interactions in rhesus monkeys. In:Behavioural Regulators of Behaviour in Primates,C. R. Carpenter (ed.), Bucknell Univ. Press, Lewisburg, pp. 124–128.Google Scholar
  13. McKenna, J., 1978. Biosocial functions of grooming behaviour among the common Indian langur monkey.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 48: 503–509.Google Scholar
  14. Seyfarth, R. M., 1980. The distribution of grooming and related behaviours among adult female vervet monkeys.Anim. Behav., 28: 798–813.Google Scholar
  15. &D. L. Cheney, 1984. Grooming, alliances, and reciprocal altruism in vervet monkeys.Nature, London, 308: 541–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sparks, J., 1967. Allogrooming in primates: A review. In:Primate Ethology,D. Morris (ed.), Weidenfeld & Nicholson, London, pp. 148–175.Google Scholar
  17. Taylor, L. &R. W. Sussman, 1985. A preliminary study of kinship and social organization in a semi-free-ranging group ofLemur catta.Int. J. Primatol., 6: 601–615.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Monkey Centre 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. A. Barton
    • 1
  1. 1.University CollegeLondon
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of St. AndrewsSt. Andrews, FifeScotland

Personalised recommendations