Primates

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 257–290 | Cite as

An ethological analysis of types of agonistic interaction in a captive group of Java-monkeys (Macaca fascicularis)

  • Frans B. M. de Waal
  • Jan A. R. A. M. van Hooff
  • Willem J. Netto
Article

Abstract

The primate literature provides many indications not only that the nature of dyadic interactions is to a large extent determined by the relations of the interacting animals with others and between these others, but also of the existence of polyadic interactions in which more than two individuals are simultaneously involved.

The objectives of the present study are to obtain a quantitative categorization of the agonistic interaction types of captive Java-monkeys and an analysis of their dynamics.

After having described the agonistic behaviour patterns of Java-monkeys we shall discuss the categorization of agonistic interaction types (depending on the number of involvees: “dyads”, “triads” and “polyads”), the way in which these types can be further differentiated on the basis of the nature and the direction of the behaviours shown (e.g., different types of alliances), and the existence of so-called “sub-directed” behaviours (i.e., non-agonistic behaviours which are shown towards a dominant third animal more or less simultaneously with aggressive behaviour directed towards an opponent).

The analysis indicates that agonistic behaviour is different both in its form and its regulation in interactions of different complexity.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altmann, S. A., 1962. A field study of the sociobiology of Rhesus monkeys, (Macaca mulatta).Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 102: 338–435.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Altmann, J., 1974. Observational study of behavior: sampling methods.Behaviour, 49: 227–267.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Angst W., 1974. Das Ausdrucksverhalten des Javaneraffen, (Macaca fascicularis Raffles).Fortschritte der Verhaltensforschung, Beiheft 15, Zeitschr. f. Tierphyschol, pp. 90.Google Scholar
  4. Bernstein, I. S. &L. G. Sharpe, 1966. Social roles in a Rhesus monkey group.Behaviour, 26: 91–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Deag, J. &J. Crook, 1971. Social behaviour and “agonistic buffering” in the wild Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvana L.).Folia primat., 15: 183–200.Google Scholar
  6. Hall, K.R.L. &I. DeVore, 1965. Baboon social behavior. In:Primate Behavior.I. DeVore (ed.), Holt, Rinehart & Winston Inc., New York, pp. 53–110.Google Scholar
  7. Hinde, R. A., 1966. Ritualization and social communication in rhesus monkeys.Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. Series B, 251: 285–294.Google Scholar
  8. ----, 1974. Interactions, relationships and social structure. In:Abstracts, Fifth Cong. Int. Primat. Soc. Nagoya, Japan, 90.Google Scholar
  9. Hooff, J.A.R.A.M. Van, 1967. The facial displays of the catarrhine monkeys and apes. In:Primate Ethology,D. Morris (ed.), Weidenfeld & Nicholson, London, pp. 7–68.Google Scholar
  10. ————, 1970. A component analysis of the structure of the social behaviour of a semi-captive group of chimpanzees.Experientia, 26: 549–550.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. ————, 1971. Aspecten van het sociale gedrag en de communicatie bij humane en hogere niet-humane primaten. Thesis, University of Utrecht. Bronder offset N.V., Rotterdam.Google Scholar
  12. Imanishi, K., 1960. Social organization of subhuman primates in their natural habitat.Current Anthrop., 1: 393–407.Google Scholar
  13. Jay, P., 1965. The common langur of North India. In:Primate Behavior,I. DeVore (ed.), Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., New York, pp. 197–249.Google Scholar
  14. Kaufmann, J.H., 1967. Social relations of adult males in a free ranging band of rhesus monkeys. In:Social Communication among Primates,S.A. Altmann (ed.), Chicago Univ. Press, pp. 73–98.Google Scholar
  15. Kawai, M., 1958. On the system of social ranks in a natural group of Japanese monkeys. I. Basic rank and dependent rank.Primates, 1: 111–130, English translation in:Japanese Monkeys,K. Imanishi & S.A. Altmann (eds.), Emory Univ. Atlanta, Georgia (1965), pp. 66–86.Google Scholar
  16. Koford, C.B., 1963a. Rank of mothers and sons in bands of rhesus monkeys.Science, 141: 356–357.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. ————, 1963b. Group relations in an Island Colony of rhesus monkeys. In:Primate Social Behavior,C.H. Southwick (ed.), D. van Nostrand Company Inc., Toronto & London, pp. 136–152.Google Scholar
  18. Kruuk, H., 1972.The Spotted Hyena: A Study of Predation and Social Bahavior. Chicago Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kummer, H., 1957. Soziales Verhalten einer Mantelpavian-Gruppe.Beih. Schweiz. Zeitschr. Psychol., 33.Google Scholar
  20. ----, 1967. Tripartite relations in Hamadryas baboons. In:Social Communication among Primates,S.A. Altmann (ed.), Chicago Univ. Press, pp. 63–71.Google Scholar
  21. ----, 1968.Social Organization of Hamadryas Baboons: A Field Study. Chicago Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  22. ————,W. Götz, &W. Angst, 1974. Triadic differentiation: an inhibitory process protecting pair bonds in baboons.Behaviour, 49: 62–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lindburg, D., 1971. The rhesus monkeys in North India, an ecological and behavioural study. In:Primate Behavior, Vol. 2,L. Rosenblum (ed), New York Acad. Press, pp. 1–106.Google Scholar
  24. Lorenz, K., 1931. Beitrag zur Ethologie sozialer Corviden.J. f. Ornithol., 79: heft 1.Google Scholar
  25. ————, 1941. Vergleichende Bewegungsstudien an Anatiden.Suppl. J. Ornith., 89: 194–294.Google Scholar
  26. Marsden, H., 1968. Agonistic behaviour of young rhesus monkeys after changes induced in social rank of their mothers.Anim. Behav., 16: 38–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Masserman, J., S. Wechkin, &M. Woolf, 1968. Alliances and aggressions among rhesus monkeys. In:Sci. & Psychoanalysis, 12: 95–100.Google Scholar
  28. Michael, R.P., 1971. Hormonal factors and aggressive behaviour in the rhesus monkey In:Influences of Hormones on the Nervous System. Proc. Int. Soc. Psychoneuroendocr., Brooklyn, 1970, Kargel, Basel. pp. 412–423.Google Scholar
  29. Nelson, K., 1964 The temporal patterning of courtship behaviour in the glandulocaudine fishes.Behaviour, 24: 90–146.Google Scholar
  30. Reynolds, V., 1962. The social life of a colony of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
  31. Sade, D.S., 1967. Determinants of dominance in a group of free-ranging rhesus monkeys. In:Social Communication among Primates,S.A. Altmann (ed.), Chicago Univ. Press, pp. 99–114.Google Scholar
  32. Schaller, G.B., 1972.The Serengeti Lion: A Study of Predator-Prey Relations. Chicago Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  33. Shirek-Ellefson, J. 1972. Social communication in some old world monkeys and gibbons. In:Primate Patterns, P. Dolhinow (ed.), Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc., 297–311.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, E.O., 1973. A further descriptive analysis of the control role in pigtail macaques (Macaca nemestrina).Primates, 14: 413–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Southwick, C.H., 1967. An experimental study of intragroup agonistic behaviour in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).Behaviour, 28: 182–209.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Struhsaker, T., 1967. Social structure among vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops).Behaviour, 29: 83–121.Google Scholar
  37. Tokuda, K. &G.D. Jensen, 1968. The leader's role in controlling aggressive behavior in a monkey group.Primates, 9: 317–320.Google Scholar
  38. Varley, M. &D. Symmes, 1966. The hierarchy of dominance in a group of macaques.Behaviour, 27: 54–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Whiten, A. &T.J. Rumsey, 1973. Agonistic buffering in the wild Barbary macaque,Macaca sylvana, L.Primates, 14: 421–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wiepkema, P.R., 1961. An ethological analysis of the reproductive behaviour of the bitterling.Arch. néerl. Zool., 14: 103–199.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Monkey Centre 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frans B. M. de Waal
    • 1
  • Jan A. R. A. M. van Hooff
    • 1
  • Willem J. Netto
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Comparative PhysiologyUniversity of UtrechtUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations