WE ARE COMMITTED TO REPORTING THE LATEST FORESTRY ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS

Volume 44 Issue 4
Aug.  2023
Article Contents
Turn off MathJax

NIU X, XIE D, LAI J D, et al. Comparison of grooming income between OMUs of Rhinopithecus bieti[J]. Journal of Sichuan Forestry Science and Technology, 2023, 44(4): 137−142 doi: 10.12172/202209200002
Citation: NIU X, XIE D, LAI J D, et al. Comparison of grooming income between OMUs of Rhinopithecus bieti[J]. Journal of Sichuan Forestry Science and Technology, 2023, 44(4): 137−142 doi: 10.12172/202209200002

Comparison of Grooming Income between OMUs of Rhinopithecus bieti


doi: 10.12172/202209200002
More Information
  • Grooming behavior is the main way for non-human primates to maintain social relations. The income of grooming can reflect the role and social ranks of individuals in the group. In order to understand the impact of individual social roles and grades on grooming income of Rhinopithecus bieti within in one male multi-female units (OMU), during July-August 2018 and February-August 2019, the data of grooming behavior and aggressive-yielding behavior of R. bieti group in Baima Snow Mountain National Nature Reserve were collected, and the grooming income and influencing factors of males and females were analyzed. The results showed that 32.3% of adult individuals in the breeding unit of R. bieti were rewarded with grooming rounds, and the average grooming time was 302 ± 255 s (n = 96). There was no difference in grooming income of dominant males among the breeding units with the same number of females (Z = 4.59, P = 0.20). In the male female bout pairs, the grooming income of male was higher than those of female (T = −6.138, df = 58, P < 0.01), but there was no difference in grooming income between difference grades female as they groomed male (Z = −1.54, P = 0.12). The grooming income of high grade female was higher than low grade female grooming income (T = −3.467, df = 36, P < 0.01) within OMU. Therefore, the grooming income of dominant males in OMU of R. bieti was higher than that of females in the multi-level society, and there was no difference in grooming income in OMU of the male grooming income with the same number of adult females. The grooming income of high grade females was higher than that of low grade females, which indicated that the grooming income of R. bieti was influenced by social roles (dominant male) and grades within OMU.
  • 加载中
  • [1] Xia D P, Li J H, Garber P A, et al. Grooming reciprocity in male Tibetan macaques[J]. American journal of primatology, 2013, 75(10): 1009−1020. doi: 10.1002/ajp.22165
    [2] 李保国,张鹏,渡边邦夫,等. 川金丝猴的相互理毛行为是否具有卫生功能[J]. 动物学报,2002,48(6):707−715.
    [3] Berthier J M, Semple S. Observing grooming promotes affiliation in Barbary macaques[J]. Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological Sciences, 2018, 285(1893): 1−8.
    [4] Borgeaud C, Bshary R. Wild Vervet Monkeys Trade Tolerance and Specific Coalitionary Support for Grooming in Experimentally Induced Conflicts[J]. Current Biology, 2015, 25(22): 3011−3016. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.10.016
    [5] Shutt K, Maclarnon A, Heistermann M, et al. Grooming in Barbary macaques: better to give than to receive?[J]. Biology Letters, 2007, 3(3): 231−233. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2007.0052
    [6] Sonnweber R S, Massen J J M, Fitch W T. Post-copulatory grooming: a conditional mating strategy?[J]. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2015, 69(11): 1749−1759. doi: 10.1007/s00265-015-1987-9
    [7] Kanngiesser P, Sueur C, Riedl K, et al. Grooming network cohesion and the role of individuals in a captive chimpanzee group[J]. American Journal of Primatology, 2011, 73(8): 758−767. doi: 10.1002/ajp.20914
    [8] Wei W, Qi X, Garber P A, et al. Supply and Demand Determine the Market Value of Access to Infants in the Golden Snub-Nosed Monkey (<italic>Rhinopithecus roxellana</italic>)[J]. PloS One, 2013, 8(6): e65962. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065962
    [9] 陈仕望,吴明阳,孙丙华,等. 黄山短尾猴理毛发生部位的差异[J]. 兽类学报,2021,41(3):330−337.
    [10] Ghiglieri M P. The Chimpanzees of Kibale Forest: a Field Study of Ecology and Social Structure[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984.
    [11] Hamilton W D. The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior[J]. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1964, 7(1): 1−16. doi: 10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4
    [12] Noe R, Hammerstein P. Biological markets[J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 1995, 10(8): 336−339.
    [13] Wei W, Qi X G, Guo S T, et al. Market Powers Predict Reciprocal Grooming in Golden Snub-Nosed Monkeys (<italic>Rhinopithecus roxellana</italic>)[J]. Plos One, 2012, 7(5): e36802. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036802
    [14] Barrett L, Henzi S P. Monkeys, markets and minds: biological markets and primate sociality[M]. Cooperation in Primates and Human, 2006, 209-232.
    [15] 李银华,李保国. 灵长类相互理毛的影响因素、功能及其利益分析[J]. 人类学学报,2004(4):334−342.
    [16] Goodall J. The Chimpanzees of Gombe: Patterns of Behavior[M]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1986.
    [17] De Waal F B M, Luttrell L M. Mechanisms of Social Reciprocity in Three Primate Species: Symmetrical Relationship Characteristics or Cognition?[J]. Ethology & Sociobiology, 1988, 9(2-4): 101−108.
    [18] Schino G. Grooming, competition and social rank among female primates: a meta-analysis[J]. Animal Behaviour, 2001, 62(2): 265−271. doi: 10.1006/anbe.2001.1750
    [19] Franz C. Allogrooming behavior and grooming site preferences in captive bonobos (<italic>Pan paniscus</italic>): Association with female dominance[J]. International Journal of Primatology, 1999, 20(4): 525−546. doi: 10.1023/A:1020338706800
    [20] Long Y C, Kirkpatrick C R, Zhong T, et al. Report on the Distribution, Population, Ecology of the Yunnan Snub-nosed Monkey (<italic>Rhinopithecus bieti</italic>)[J]. Primates, 1994, 35(2): 241−250. doi: 10.1007/BF02382060
    [21] Li B G, Pan R L, Oxnard C E. Extinction of Snub-Nosed Monkeys in China During the Past 400 Years[J]. International Journal of Primatology, 2002, 23(6): 1227−1244. doi: 10.1023/A:1021122819845
    [22] Long Y C, Bleisch W V, Richardson M. Rhinopithecus bieti. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020: e. T19597A17943738. 2020.
    [23] Xiao W, Ding W, Cui L W, et al. Habitat Degradation ofRhinopithecus bieti in Yunnan, China[J]. International Journal of Primatology, 2003, 24(2): 389−398. doi: 10.1023/A:1023009518806
    [24] Huang Z P, Scott M B, Li Y P, et al. Black-and-white snub-nosed monkey (<italic>Rhinopithecus bieti</italic>) feeding behavior in a degraded forest fragment: clues to a stressed population[J]. Primates, 2017, 58(4): 517−524. doi: 10.1007/s10329-017-0618-7
    [25] Kirkpatrick R C, Long Y C, Zhong T, et al. Social organization and range use in the Yunnan snub-nosed monkey <italic>Rhinopithecus bieti</italic>[J]. International Journal of Primatology, 1998, 19(1): 13−51. doi: 10.1023/A:1020302809584
    [26] 黎大勇,任宝平,和鑫明,等. 白马雪山自然保护区响古箐滇金丝猴的食性[J]. 兽类学报,2011,31(4):241−248.
    [27] Xiang Z F, Huo S, Xiao W. Activity budget of <italic>Rhinopithecus bieti</italic> at Tibet: Effects of day length, temperature and food availability[J]. Current Zoology, 2010, 56(6): 650−659. doi: 10.1093/czoolo/56.6.650
    [28] Wang S J, Huang Z P, He Y C, et al. Mating behavior and birth seasonality of black-and-white snub-nosed monkeys (<italic>Rhinopithecus bieti</italic>) at Mt. Lasha[J]. Zoological Research, 2012, 33(3): 241−248.
    [29] 和鑫明,夏万才,巴桑,等. 滇金丝猴主雄应对配偶雌性数量的理毛策略[J]. 广西师范大学学报(自然科学版),2021,39(1):38−44.
    [30] Jeanne A. Observational study of behavior: Sampling methods[J]. Behaviour, 1974, 49(4): 227−265.
    [31] 夏万才,胡杰,任宝平,等. 人工辅助投食滇金丝猴一雄多雌单元之间的等级序列[J]. 兽类学报,2017,4(37):57−64.
    [32] 魏玮. 秦岭川金丝猴中互惠利他行为及生物市场现象的研究[D]. 西北大学, 2013.
    [33] Manson J H, David Navarrete C, Silk J B, et al. Time-matched grooming in female primates? New analyses from two species[J]. Animal Behaviour, 2004, 67(3): 493−500. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.05.009
    [34] Cui L W, Sun Q L, Li B G. Dominance hierarchy and social relationships in a group of Captive black-and-white snub-nosed monkeys (<italic>Rhinopithecus bieti</italic>)[J]. Zoological Research, 2014, 35(3): 204−213.
    [35] Li Y P, Zhong T, Huang Z P, et al. Male and female birth attendance and assistance in a species of non-human primate (<italic>Rhinopithecus bieti</italic>)[J]. Behavioural Processes, 2020, 181: 104248. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2020.104248
    [36] Fairbanks L A. Relationships among adult females in captive vervet monkeys: Testing a model of rank-related attractiveness[J]. Animal Behaviour, 1980, 28(3): 853−859. doi: 10.1016/S0003-3472(80)80145-X
  • 加载中
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Tables(4)

Article views(287) PDF downloads(14) Cited by()

Related
Proportional views

Comparison of Grooming Income between OMUs of Rhinopithecus bieti

doi: 10.12172/202209200002
  • 1. Institute of Eastern-Himalaya Biodiversity Research, Dali University, Dali 671003, China
  • 2. Baima Snow Mountain National Nature Reserve Administrative Bureau, Deqing 674499, China
  • 3. Yunling Black-and-white snub-nosed Monkey Observation and Research Station of Yunnan Province, Dali 671003, China
  • Corresponding author: 136504206@qq.com 302780550@qq.com

Abstract: Grooming behavior is the main way for non-human primates to maintain social relations. The income of grooming can reflect the role and social ranks of individuals in the group. In order to understand the impact of individual social roles and grades on grooming income of Rhinopithecus bieti within in one male multi-female units (OMU), during July-August 2018 and February-August 2019, the data of grooming behavior and aggressive-yielding behavior of R. bieti group in Baima Snow Mountain National Nature Reserve were collected, and the grooming income and influencing factors of males and females were analyzed. The results showed that 32.3% of adult individuals in the breeding unit of R. bieti were rewarded with grooming rounds, and the average grooming time was 302 ± 255 s (n = 96). There was no difference in grooming income of dominant males among the breeding units with the same number of females (Z = 4.59, P = 0.20). In the male female bout pairs, the grooming income of male was higher than those of female (T = −6.138, df = 58, P < 0.01), but there was no difference in grooming income between difference grades female as they groomed male (Z = −1.54, P = 0.12). The grooming income of high grade female was higher than low grade female grooming income (T = −3.467, df = 36, P < 0.01) within OMU. Therefore, the grooming income of dominant males in OMU of R. bieti was higher than that of females in the multi-level society, and there was no difference in grooming income in OMU of the male grooming income with the same number of adult females. The grooming income of high grade females was higher than that of low grade females, which indicated that the grooming income of R. bieti was influenced by social roles (dominant male) and grades within OMU.

  • 理毛行为是指动物对自己或其他个体身体进行清理的过程[1]。理毛行为具有卫生清洁[2]、增强参与者双方间社会联系[3]、建立稳定的社会联盟[4]、缓和个体间的激动情绪[5]、增强异性间性关系、增加交配机会[6]和增强群体内成员间社会凝聚力等功能[7]。因此,理毛行为是衡量灵长类群体稳定性和凝聚力的重要指标[1],也是理解灵长类个体对自然环境和社会环境的行为适应策略[8],其研究有助于了解非人灵长类社会结构和社会关系的建立和维持机制[9]

    灵长类理毛的功能和发生机制有以下假说:1)卫生功能假说(Hygienic function hypothesis)认为相互理毛是为了保持身体表面的清洁以控制疾病的发生[10];2)社会功能假说(Social function hypothesis)认为理毛行为可以缓解个体间的紧张度,维持社会等级和保持社群稳定[8, 11];3)生物市场理论(biological market theory)认为群居动物个体间常常会依靠某种行为来交换有价值的“货物”,以获得自身所需的资源或服务,在个体与其他个体进行合作时,它们便会在合作中付出投入与收益[12],理毛的生物市场理论在狒狒(Papio cynocephalus)和川金丝猴(Rhinopithecus roxellana)中被验证[8, 13, 14]

    灵长类理毛收益受社会角色和等级等因素影响[15]。短尾猴(Macaca arctoides)和黑猩猩(Pan troglodytes)的理毛研究中雄性理毛收益高于雌性[16, 17];倭黑猩猩(Pan paniscus)和川金丝猴等低等级个体会给高等级个体提供更多的理毛[8, 18, 19]。然而,关于灵长类的社会角色和等级对于个体理毛收益的影响关注不足。

    滇金丝猴(Rhinopithecus bieti)隶属灵长目(Primates)、猴科(Cercopithecidae)、疣猴亚科(Colobinae)、仰鼻猴属(Rhinopithecus),生活的海拔高达4600 m,是分布海拔最高的灵长类之一[20, 21]。仅分布于澜沧江与金沙江之间的云岭山系,北至西藏的芒康县,南至云南的云龙县,是国家I级重点保护野生动物,为IUCN红色名录濒危物种[22],其生境主要以暗针叶林、针阔混交林、阔叶落叶林和硬叶阔叶林为主[23, 24]。滇金丝猴具有复杂的重层社会,即由若干个一雄多雌家庭(OMU)和全雄群(AMU)构成,个体之间关系复杂于其他灵长类物种[25]。目前对滇金丝猴的研究集中在种群分布和数量、社会结构、栖息地利用、繁殖行为、食物选择和日活动时间分配等方面[26-28]。前期研究发现在滇金丝猴繁殖家庭雌性数量会影响主雄的理毛收益,配偶雌性越少,主雄获得的理毛收益越少[29]。然而,对于繁殖家庭内雌性数量相同时,主雄的理毛收益是否一致缺乏认识。此外,雌性等级是否影响雌性的理毛收益仍缺乏关注。本文选取了滇金丝猴4个雌性数量均为2只成年个体的繁殖家庭,拟解决以下问题:1)滇金丝猴OMU内相同雌性数量时雄性的理毛收益是否相同;2)繁殖家庭内不同等级雌性的理毛收益是否一致。最终,阐明滇金丝猴繁殖家庭内个体的社会角色和等级对理毛收益影响,了解重层社会滇金丝猴的维持模式。

    • 研究地点位于云南白马雪山国家级自然保护区南端的响古箐(N 27°36', E 99°15'),该区域植被类型主要为云南松林、常绿阔叶林和针阔混交林,年降水量为1 370.7 mm,年平均气温为9.8℃[26]

      研究对象为白马雪山滇金丝猴国家公园的响古箐猴群,该猴群公园每天定时进行人工辅助投食,食物主要为松萝,以及少量瓜子、花生、苹果干等,猴群已经习惯了人类的接近,可实现近距离观察、个体识别和数据收集。2018年7月和8月收集到4个繁殖家庭(OMU,每个家庭1只雄性,2只雌性)的理毛数据,2019年2月和8月收集到3个繁殖家庭(OMU,每个家庭1只雄性和2只雌性)的理毛数据,因2018年收集到OMU内理毛数据较少,且研究期间家庭大小都稳定不变,参照以往滇金丝猴理毛研究可用多年数据合并统计[2],因此,将2018年和2019年理毛数据合并分析(表1)。

      家庭
      Family
      成年雄性
      Adult male
      成年雌性
      Adult female
      青少年个体
      Adolescent individual
      婴猴
      Infant monkey
      总数
      Total
      观察时间/h
      Observation time
      理毛回合数
      Grooming bouts
      裂鼻121151813
      帅哥121261727
      红脸12227624
      大个子122162032

      Table 1.  Members of four OMUs of Xiangguqing R. bieti in Baima Snow Mountain Nature Reserve, Yunnan in 2018 − 2019

    • 采用焦点动物取样法观察一雄多雌家庭的行为,用全事件记录法收集攻击-屈服行为和理毛行为数据[30, 31]。理毛记录包括发起者、接受者、开始时间和结束时间;攻击-屈服记录包括攻击行为发起者、接受者、开始时间、结束时间、胜利者和屈服者。每天收集时间为10:00—17:00,在2 m—50 m的距离轮换收集各焦点OMU数据。焦点个体观察时间10 min,每个家庭观察满30 min为1次有效数据。野外工作44天,共收到96个理毛回合。

      理毛回合(Bout):理毛开始到结束的过程,结束理毛指中断10 min或个体离开相距1 m。当回合内理毛方向改变时称为1亚回合[13]

    • 采用回报指数(R)来评估理毛收益[32]$ R = \dfrac{{{G_{AB}} - {G_{BA}}}}{{{G_{AB}} + {G_{BA}}}} $R用于衡量理毛行为的对称性。GAB:个体A对个体B理毛时间,GBA:个体B对个体A的理毛时间。R值范围为 [−1, 1],若R = 0,代表理毛投入等于收益;若R < 0,表明A个体理毛投入少,收益多,B个体则相反;若R > 0,A个体投入多收益少,B个体则相反。将个体分别定义为理毛对中的A个体和B个体,并将OMU分为不同的类别组(表2)。

      理毛对类型
      Grooming pair type
      个体A
      Individual A
      个体B
      Individual B
      雌-雄
      Female - Male
      成年雄性成年雌性
      高等级雌性-低等级雌性
      High grade female - Low grade female
      高等级雌性低等级雌性

      Table 2.  Grouping of study individuals of Xiangguqing R. bieti in Baima Snow Mountain Nature Reserve, Yunnan in 2018 − 2019

      家庭内成年雌性个体间的等级通过优势指数法计算[33]。采用非参数独立样本(Wilcoxon)检验分析相同雌性数量繁殖家庭主雄间的理毛收益的差异,及繁殖家庭内高等级雌性和低等级对雄性理毛收益的差异;同时采用T检验检验雄性与雌性理毛回合对中雄性与雌性理毛收益的差异,及繁殖家庭内高等级雌性和低等级雌性的差异。数据用SPSS 22.0软件处理,显著性设为P < 0.05。

    2.   结果与分析
    • 共记录到96个理毛回合,平均理毛时间为302 ± 255 s(n = 96),仅有32.3%的理毛回合发生了互惠回报。大个子OMU中成年雌性个体间的等级序列为细毛 > 豆芽鼻;红脸OMU中为白眉 > 恩登;裂鼻OMU中为白玉顶 > 四己;帅哥OMU中为零甲 > 四丁(表3)。

      家庭
      Family
      成年雌性优势指数
      Adult female dominance index
      等级
      Rank
      大个子细毛0.33细毛 > 豆芽鼻
      豆芽鼻0.17
      红脸白眉0.25白眉 > 恩登
      恩登0.00
      裂鼻白玉顶0.25白玉顶 > 四己
      四己0.00
      帅哥零甲0.25零甲 > 四丁
      四丁0.00

      Table 3.  Rank sequence of adult female individuals in four OMUs of Xiangguqing R. bieti in Baima Snow Mountain Nature Reserve, Yunnan in 2018 — 2019

    • 滇金丝猴相同雌性数量OMU雄性间的理毛收益无差异(Z = 4.59, P = 0.20),雄性个体平均理毛收益为:−0.62 ± 0.71(n = 59)。各繁殖家庭的雄性理毛收益如下:大个子家庭内雄性个体收益为 −0.59 ± 0.76(n = 25),红脸家庭雄性个体收益为 −1(n = 13),裂鼻家庭雄性个体收益为 −0.59 ± 0.58(n = 5),帅哥家庭雄性个体收益为 −0.27 ± 0.91(n = 16)。

      不同OMU中性别对理毛收益的影响不同,雄性个体的理毛收益高于雌性个体(T = −6.138, df = 58, P < 0.01)(见表4)。从繁殖家庭角度来看,仅大个子家庭雄性个体收益高于雌性个体(T = 3.866, df = 24, P < 0.01);而其他三个家庭雄性和雌性的理毛收益无差异(红脸: T = 0, df = 12, P = 1; 裂鼻: T = 2.267, df = 4, P = 0.086; 帅哥: T = 1.135, df = 15, P = 0.274)。

      理毛对类型
      Grooming dyads
      回合数
      Bouts
      项目
      Project
      R(mean ± SD)TdfP
      雌-雄
      Female - Male
      59成年雄性−0.59 ± 0.74−6.13858< 0.001
      成年雌性0.59 ± 0.74
      高等级雌性-低等级雌性
      High grade female - Low grade female
      37高等级雌性−0.37 ± 0.65−3.46736< 0.001
      低等级雌性0.37 ± 0.65

      Table 4.  Difference of each grooming dyads on grooming income of Xiangguqing R. bieti in Baima Snow Mountain Nature Reserve, Yunnan in 2018—2019

      在雄性-雌性理毛对中,总体上高等级雌性与低等级雌性对雄性的理毛收益无差异(Z = −1.54, P = 0.12);高等级雌性个体对雄性个体理毛收益为0.92 ± 0.29(n = 59),低等级雌性个体对雄性个体理毛收益为0.75 ± 0.53(n = 59)。从繁殖家庭来看,仅大个子家庭高等级雌性(细毛)理毛收益高于低等级雌性(豆芽鼻)(Z = −2.84, P < 0.01),而其他三个家庭内不同等级雌性对雄性的理毛收益无差异(红脸: Z = 0.00, P = 1.00; 裂鼻: Z = −0.79, P = 0.43; 帅哥: Z = −0.67, P = 0.50)。

    • 高等级雌性的理毛收益高于低等级雌性(T = −3.467, df = 36, P < 0.01)(表4)。高等雌性个体理毛收益为−0.37 ± 0.65(n = 37),低等级雌性个体理毛收益为0.37 ± 0.65(n = 37)。从繁殖家庭来看,仅帅哥家庭高等级雌性的理毛收益高于低等级雌性(T = −3.390, df = 10, P < 0.01);而其他三个家庭的高等级雌性和低等级雌性的理毛收益无差异(大个子: T = −0.033, df = 6, P = 0.975; 红脸: T = −1.861, df = 10, P = 0.092; 裂鼻: T = −1.887, df = 7, P = 0.101)。

    3.   讨论
    • 本文对滇金丝猴具有2成年雌性数量繁殖家庭个体的理毛收益开展研究,发现雄性的理毛收益均高于雌性,但不同家庭间主雄的理毛收益无差异,等级对于雌性与雄性的理毛收益无影响;雌性与雄性个体理毛中,雄性收益高于雌性,高等级雌性在成年雌性理毛对中有更高的收益。

    • 繁殖家庭内社会角色(家庭主雄和雌性)不同会影响其理毛的收益[32]。本文中发现繁殖家庭内雄性理毛收益大于雌性,这与黑猩猩和川金丝猴理毛收益受社会角色影响的研究结论一致[17, 13]。川金丝猴与滇金丝猴都为重层社会组织,在一夫多妻的繁殖家庭内雄性是为稀缺资源,雌性增加对雄性的理毛以建立良好关系,获取交配响应和其他资源的机会[13, 34],如雄性在雌性繁殖过程中给予的照料和帮助[35]。此外,这也可能与滇金丝猴繁殖家庭内雄性等级高于雌性有关[34]

    • 灵长类理毛的一个普遍特征是用理毛来获取相关利益,社会等级与理毛收益有着密切的关系[8, 13]。本文中发现高等级雌性个体理毛收益高于低等级个体,这与倭黑猩猩、长尾黑颚猴和川金丝猴的理毛收益受等级影响的结论一致[8, 18, 36]。滇金丝猴、倭黑猩猩、长尾黑颚猴和川金丝猴家庭中都具有明确的等级关系[8, 18, 34, 36],群内个体之间等级关系存在可以维持群内的相对平衡,从而保存群体的稳定性,有利于种群的生存和繁衍。

    4.   结论
    • 总之,在滇金丝猴繁殖家庭内雄性理毛收益大于雌性;繁殖家庭内高等级雌性理毛收益大于低等级雌性。因此,滇金丝猴个体理毛收益受其社会角色和等级影响。

Reference (36)

Catalog

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return