Primates

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 347–357

Social rank and body size as determinants of positional behavior inPan troglodytes

  • Kevin D. Hunt
Article

Abstract

A yearlong study of the positional behavior ofPan troglodytes at the Mahale Mountains National Park yielded 571 hr of observation.Cant (1987) articulated four predictions concerning the relationship between body weight/branch diameter and positional behavior based on the classic suspensory-ape paradigm. He noted that only two were supported by orangutan data. Three of these four hypothesis were not supported by chimpanzee data, as follows: there was no significant difference between the three largest males and the four smallest males in (1) branch diameters (5.8 cm vs 5.2 cm) nor (2) in the percentage of arm-hanging (13.6% vs 12.1%); and (3) large males did not arm-hang significantly more often than small males in any of three support diameter categories. The fourth hypothesis, that arm-hanging should be more common among smaller branches, was supported: arm-hanging as a percentage of all posture rose from 2.5% to 8.3% to 24% as stratum size decreased from >10 cm to <3 cm. The possibility that the first three hypotheses failed because of confounding effects of a correlation between body size and social rank was examined. Multiple regressions were done on 6600 2-min instantaneous observations on focal individuals. With social rank effects factored out, larger individuals preferentially utilized smaller, rather than larger supports. When positional mode frequencies were compared between large and small males matched for social rank, large males exhibited a lower frequency of arm-hanging than small males. An unexpected result was that social rank more consistently predicted branch diameter choice than body size. The most profound trend was for high ranking males to use larger supports, even though they spent more time in the terminal branches. These results suggest that (1) suspensory behavior is functionally related to small branch diameters; (2) chimpanzees do not prefer smaller branches, rather they are forced into them by food choice limitations; and (3) social rank more profoundly affects chimpanzee behavior than body weight.

Key Words

Group effects Feeding behavior Arm-hanging Positional behavior 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altmann, J., 1974. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods.Behavior, 49: 227–267.Google Scholar
  2. Andrews, P. &C. P. Groves, 1976. Gibbons and brachiation. In:Gibbon and Siamang,D. Rumbaugh (ed.), Karger, Basel, pp. 167–218.Google Scholar
  3. Avis, V., 1962. Brachiation: the crucial issue for man's ancestry.Southwestern J. Anthropol., 18: 119–148.Google Scholar
  4. Bell, R. H., 1971. A grazing ecosystem in the Serengeti.Sci. Amer., 225: 86–93.Google Scholar
  5. Biegert, J. &R. Maurer, 1972. Rumpfskelettlange, Allometrien und Körperproportionen bei catarrihinin Primaten.Folia Primatol., 17: 142–156.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bygott, J. D., 1979. Agonistic Behavior, dominance and social structure in wild chimpanzees of the Gombe National Park. In:The Great Apes,D. A. Hamburg &E. R. McCown (eds.), Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, pp. 404–427.Google Scholar
  7. Cant, J. G. H., 1987. Effects of sexual dimorphism in body size of feeding postural behavior of Sumatran orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus).Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 74: 143–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cartmill, M., 1974. Pads and claws in arboreal locomotion. In:Primate Locomotion,F. A. Jenkins,Jr. (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 45–83.Google Scholar
  9. ———— &K. Milton, 1977. The lorisiform wrist joint and the evolution of “brachiating” adaptations in the Hominoidea.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 47: 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gaulin, S. J. C., 1979. A Jarman-Bell model of primate feeding niches.Human Ecol., 7: 1–20.Google Scholar
  11. ———— &M. Konner, 1977. On the natural diet of primates, including humans. In:Nutrition and the Brain, Vol. 1.R. Wurtman &J. Wurtman (eds.), Raven Press, New York, pp. 1–86.Google Scholar
  12. Goodall, J., 1986.The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  13. Grand, T. I., 1972. A mechanical interpretation of terminal branch feeding.J. Mammal., 53: 198–201.Google Scholar
  14. ————, 1984. Motion economy within the canopy: four strategies for mobility. In:Adaptations for Foraging in Nonhuman Primates,P. S. Rodman &J. G. H. Cant (eds.), Columbia Univ. Press, New York, pp. 54–72.Google Scholar
  15. Hunt, K. D., 1989. Positional behavior inPan troglodytes at the Mahale Mountains and Gombe Stream National Parks, Tanzania. Ph. D. diss., Univ. of Michigan. Ann Arbor, Univ. Microfilms.Google Scholar
  16. ————, 1991a. Positional behavior in the Hominoidea.Int. J. Primatol., 12: 95–118.Google Scholar
  17. ————, 1991b. Mechanical implications of chimpanzee positional behavior.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 86: 521–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jarman, P. J., 1974. The social organization of antelope in relation to their ecology.Behaviour, 58: 215–267.Google Scholar
  19. Jungers, W. L., 1984. Scaling of the hominoid locomotor skeleton with special references to lesser apes. In:The Lesser Apes: Evolutionary and Behavioral Biology,H. Preuschoft,D. J. Chivers,W. Y. Brockelman, &N. Creel (eds.), Edinburgh Univ. Press, Edinburgh, pp. 146–169.Google Scholar
  20. ————, 1985. Body size and scaling of limb proportions in primates. In:Size and Scaling in Primate Biology,W. L. Jungers (ed.), Plenum, New York, pp. 337–343.Google Scholar
  21. ———— &R. L. Susman, 1984. Body size and skeletal allometry in African apes. In:The Pygmy Chimpanzee,R. L. Susman (ed.), Plenum, New York, pp. 131–178.Google Scholar
  22. Kay, R. F., 1975. The functional adaptations of primate molar teeth.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 43: 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keith, A., 1891. Anatomical notes on Malay apes.J. Straits Br. R. Asiat. Soc., 23: 77–94.Google Scholar
  24. ————, 1923. Man's posture: its evolution and disorder.Brit. Med. J., 1: 451–454, 499–502, 545–548, 587–590, 624–626, 669–672.Google Scholar
  25. Lewis, O. J., 1965. Evolutionary change in the primate wrist and inferior radio-ulnar joints.Anat. Rev., 151: 275–286.Google Scholar
  26. ————, 1969. The hominoid wrist joint.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 30: 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. ————, 1970. The development of the human wrist joint during the fetal period.Anat. Rec., 166: 499–516.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. ————, 1971a. The contrasting morphology found in the wrist joints of semi-brachiating monkeys and brachiating apes.Folia Primatol., 16: 248–256.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. ————, 1971b. Brachiation and the early evolution of the Hominoidea.Nature, 230: 577–579.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. ————, 1972. Evolution of the hominoid wrist. In:The Functional and Evolutionary Biology of Primates,R. H. Tuttle (ed.), Aldine, Chicago, pp. 207–222.Google Scholar
  31. ————, 1974. The wrist articulation of the Anthropoidea. In:Primate Locomotion,F. A. Jenkins,Jr. (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 143–169.Google Scholar
  32. Mendel, F., 1976. Postural and locomotor behavior ofAlouatta palliata on various substrata.Folia Primatol., 26: 36–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Miller, R. A., 1932. Evolution of the pectoral girdle and forelimb in the primates.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 17: 1–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Napier, J. R., 1963a. Brachiation and brachiators.Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond., 10: 183–195.Google Scholar
  35. ————, 1963b. The locomotor functions of hominids. In:Classification and Human Evolution,S. L. Washburn (ed.), Aldine, Chicago, pp. 178–189.Google Scholar
  36. ————, 1967. Evolutionary aspects of primate locomotion.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 27: 333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nishida, T., 1968. The social group of wild chimpanzees of the Mahale Mountains,Primates, 9: 167–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ripley, S., 1970. Leaves and leaf-monkeys: the social organization of foraging gray langurs (Presbytis entellus thersites). In:Old World Monkeys: Evolution, Systematics, and Behavior,J. R. Napier &P. H. Napier (eds.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 481–509.Google Scholar
  39. ————, 1976. Gray zones and gray langurs: Is the “semi-” concept seminal?Yrbk, Phys. Anthropol., 20: 376–394.Google Scholar
  40. ————, 1979. Environmental grain, niche diversification, and positional behavior in Neogene primates: an evolutionary hypothesis. In:Environment, Behavior and Morphology: Dynamic Interactions in Primates,M. E. Morbeck,H. Preuschoft, &N. Gomberg (eds.), Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., pp. 91–104.Google Scholar
  41. Rollinson, J. &R. D. Martin, 1981. Comparative aspects of primate locomotion, with special references to arboreal cercopithecines. In:Vertebrate Locomotion,M. H. Day (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 377–423.Google Scholar
  42. Rose, M. D., 1974. Postural adaptations in New and Old World monkeys. In:Primate Locomotion,F. A. Jenkins Jr. (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 201–222.Google Scholar
  43. Shea, B. T., 1984. An allometric perspective on the morphological and evolutionary relationships between pygmy (Pan paniscus) and common (Pan troglodytes) chimpanzees. In:The Pygmy Chimpanzee,R. L. Susman (ed.), Plenum, New York, pp. 89–130.Google Scholar
  44. Uehara, S. &T. Nishida, 1987. Body weights of wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) of the Mahale Mountains National Park, Tanzania.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 72: 315–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Washburn, S. L., 1957. Ischial callosities as sleeping adaptations.Amer. J. Phys. Anthropol., 15: 269–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Monkey Centre 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin D. Hunt
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations