Abstract
The male-female and male-male interactions of hybrid baboons betweenPapio anubis andP. hamadryas were analyzed quantitatively in two free-ranging groups in the Awash Valley, Ethiopia. Morphologically, one group (the Kerrayu group) was closer to hamadryas, while the other (the Gorge group) was closer to anubis. The adult males were classified into four categories; i.e., leaders of one-male units, males in pair units (both in the Kerrayu group), males with a closer appearance to hamadryas, and males with an anubis-like appearance (both in the Gorge group). These categories coincided with the morphological gradient from hamadryas to anubis. Social behavior was described in terms of 53 kinds of behavioral elements identified. In both groups, the closer a male was to being hamadryas in morphology, the more frequent was the aggressive behavior it tended to address toward partner females. The patterns of male-female interactions were compared between one-male units and pair units in the Kerrayu group. In one-male units, females responded immediately with obedient behavior to the males' behavior of directing visual attention toward them. In pair units, females responded with affinitive or avoiding behavior to physical contact by males. The flow of male social behavior was resolved into transitions from one behavioral element to another, and the succession rates for all the observed transitions were independently computed within each male category. By comparing the principal pathways of the behavioral sequences between male categories, 31 “basic pathways” were identified, which were presumed to be common to bothP. anubis andP. hamadryas. The basic pathways were composed of four main behavioral categories, i.e.,Contact, Visual-spacing, Aggressive behavior toward females, andAppeasing behavior toward males. In one-male units, transitions fromVisual-spacing toAggressive behavior were clearly recognized, whereas the principal pathways in pair units lacked such transitions. The frequency distributions of behavioral elements among the above behavioral categories were compared among the four male categories. The more prevalent anubis characters were in morphology, the larger was the proportion thatContact behavior occupied in the total amount of social behavior. The more prevalent hamadryas characters were, the larger was the proportion thatVisual-spacing behavior occupied. The leaders of one-male units showed a higher percentage ofAggressive behavior than did males of the other three categories. A conspicuous difference was observed in the percentage ofAppeasing behavior between the Gorge and Kerrayu groups. It appeared that the high frequency ofAppeasing behavior among males in the Kerrayu group contributed to the spatial cohesion of this group. The similarities of morphology, principal pathways, and frequency distribution of behavior were calculated for every combination of the four male categories. The morphological similarities correlated best with the similarities of principal pathways. It is concluded that the sequential structure of the male social behavior was strongly correlated with the genetic background, while the frequency of social behavior itself was subject to factors other than innate behavioral tendencies, such as the characteristics of the social environment and social context.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Altmann, J., 1974. Observational study of behavior: Sampling methods.Behaviour, 49: 227–267.
Alvarez, F. &C. Cónsul, 1978. The structure of social behaviour inTheropithecus gelada.Primates, 19: 45–59.
Enomoto, T., 1974. The sexual behavior of Japanese monkeys.J. Human Evol., 3: 351–372.
Gartlan, J. S. &T. T. Struhsaker, 1972. Polyspecific associations and niche separation of rainforest anthropoids in Cameroon, West Africa.J. Zool., London, 168: 221–266.
Gautier-Hion, A. &J.-P. Gautier, 1974. Les associations polyspécifiques de Cercopitheques du Plateau de M'passa (Gabon).Folia Primatol., 22: 134–177.
Hausfater, G., 1975.Dominance and Reproduction in Baboons (Papio cynocephalus):A Quantitative Analysis. Contributions to Primatology, Vol. 7, S. Karger, Basel.
Hinde, R. A., 1975. Interactions, relationships and social structure in non-human primates. In:Proceed. 5th Cong. Int. Primatol. Soc.,S. Kondo,M. Kawai,A. Ehara, &S. Kawamura (eds.), Japan Science Press, Tokyo, pp. 13–24.
Hooff, J. A. R. A. M. van, 1971.Aspecten van het Sociale Gedrag en de Communicatie bij Humane en Hogere Niet-Humane Primaten (Aspect of the Social Behaviour and Communication in Human and Higher Non-Human Primates). Bronder-Offset n.v., Rotterdam.
Kummer, H., 1968.Social Organization of Hamadryas Baboons: A Field Study. S. Karger, Basel & Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago.
————, 1971.Primate Societies: Group Techniques of Ecological Adaptation. Aldine-Atherton, Inc., Chicago.
————, 1975. Rules of dyad and group formation among captive gelada baboons (Theropithecus gelada). In:Proceed. 5th Cong. Int. Primatol. Soc.,S. Kondo,M. Kawai,A. Ehara, &S. Kawamura (eds.), Japan Science Press, Tokyo, pp. 129–159.
————,J. J. Abegglen, Ch. Bachmann, J. Falett, &H. Sigg, 1978. Grooming relationship and object competition among hamadryas baboons. In:Recent Advances in Primatology, Vol. 1: Behaviour,D. J. Chivers &J. Herbert (eds.), Academic Press, London, pp. 31–38.
————,W. Goetz, &W. Angst, 1970. Cross-species modification of social behavior in baboons. In:Old World Monkeys: Evolution, Systematics, and Behavior,J. R. Napier &P. H. Napier (eds.), Academic Press, London, pp. 351–363.
Mason, W. A., 1978. Ontogeny of social systems. In:Recent Advances in Primatology, Vol. 1: Behaviour,D. J. Chivers &J. Herbert (eds.), Academic Press, London, pp. 5–14.
Mori, A., 1975. Signals found in the grooming interactions of wild Japanese monkeys of the Koshima troop.Primates, 16: 107–140.
Mori, A., 1982. An ethological study on chimpansees at the artificial feeding place in the Mahale Mountains, Tanzania: With special reference to the booming situation.Primates, 23: 45–65.
————, 1984. An ethological study of pygmy chimpanzees in Wamba, Zaïre: A comparison with chimpanzees.Primates, 25: 255–278.
Müller, H., 1980. Variations of social behaviour in a baboon hybrid zone (Papio anubis × Papio hamadryas) in Ethiopia. Inaugural dissertation, Zürich Univ., Zürich.
Nagel, U., 1973. A comparison of anubis baboons, hamadryas baboons and their hybrids at a species border in Ethiopia.Folia Primatol, 19: 104–165.
Seyfarth, R. M., 1977. A model of social grooming among adult female monkeys.J. Theor. Biol., 65: 671–698.
Sigg, H., A. Stolba, J. J. Abegglen, &V. Dasser, 1982. Life history of hamadryas baboons: Physical development, infant mortality, reproductive parameters and family relationships.Primates, 23: 473–487.
Stammbach, E., 1978. On social differentiation in group of captive female hamadryas baboons.Behaviour, 67: 322–338.
Sugawara, K., 1979. Sociological study of a wild group of hybrid baboons betweenPapio anubis andP. hamadryas in the Awash Valley, Ethiopia.Primates, 20: 21–56.
————, 1980. Nihonzaru, hanareosu no shakaiteki deai no kouzou (Structure of social encounters among non-troop males of Japanese monkeys).Kikan Jinruigaku, 11(11): 3–70. (in Japanese)
————, 1982. Sociological comparison between two wild groups of anubis-hamadryas hybrid baboons.Afr. Stud. Monogr., 2: 73–131.
Vaitl, E., 1978. Nature and implications of the complexly organized social system in nonhuman primates. In:Recent Advances in Primatology, Vol. 1: Behaviour,D. J. Chivers &J. Herbert (eds.). Academic Press, London, pp. 31–38.
Waal, F. B. M. de, J. A. R. A. M. van Hooff, &W. J. Netto, 1976. An ethological analysis of types of agonistic interaction in a captive group of Java-monkeys (Macaca fascicularis).Primates, 17: 257–290.
Waster, P. M., 1980. Polyspecific associations ofCercocebus albigena: Geographic variation and ecological correlates.Folia Primatol., 33: 57–76.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
About this article
Cite this article
Sugawara, K. Ethological study of the social behavior of hybrid baboons betweenPapio anubis andP. hamadryas in free-ranging groups. Primates 29, 429–448 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02381132
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02381132