Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts.
Authors:	Wilson, Michael L., Matsuzawa, Tetsuro, Mitani, John C., Mjungu, Deus C., Morgan, David, Muller, Martin N., Mundry, Roger, Pruetz, Jill, Pusey, Anne E., Sanz, Crickette, Schel, Anne M., Boesch, Christophe, Hohmann, Gottfried, Riedel, Julia, Wittig, Roman M., Waller, Michel, White, Frances, Watts, David P., Zuberbühler, Klaus, Wrangham, Richard W.
Source:	Nature. 9/18/2014, Vol. 513 Issue 7518, p414-417. 4p. 3 Charts, 2 Graphs.
Subjects:	Chimpanzee behavior research, Bonobo, Bonobo behavior, Animal aggression, Animal habitations, Mammals
Abstract:	Observations of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) provide valuable comparative data for understanding the significance of conspecific killing. Two kinds of hypothesis have been proposed. Lethal violence is sometimes concluded to be the result of adaptive strategies, such that killers ultimately gain fitness benefits by increasing their access to resources such as food or mates. Alternatively, it could be a non-adaptive result of human impacts, such as habitat change or food provisioning. To discriminate between these hypotheses we compiled information from 18 chimpanzee communities and 4 bonobo communities studied over five decades. Our data include 152 killings (n = 58 observed, 41 inferred, and 53 suspected killings) by chimpanzees in 15 communities and one suspected killing by bonobos. We found that males were the most frequent attackers (92% of participants) and victims (73%); most killings (66%) involved intercommunity attacks; and attackers greatly outnumbered their victims (median 8:1 ratio). Variation in killing rates was unrelated to measures of human impacts. Our results are compatible with previously proposed adaptive explanations for killing by chimpanzees, whereas the human impact hypothesis is not supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Nature is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection

Description
Abstract:	Observations of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) provide valuable comparative data for understanding the significance of conspecific killing. Two kinds of hypothesis have been proposed. Lethal violence is sometimes concluded to be the result of adaptive strategies, such that killers ultimately gain fitness benefits by increasing their access to resources such as food or mates. Alternatively, it could be a non-adaptive result of human impacts, such as habitat change or food provisioning. To discriminate between these hypotheses we compiled information from 18 chimpanzee communities and 4 bonobo communities studied over five decades. Our data include 152 killings (n = 58 observed, 41 inferred, and 53 suspected killings) by chimpanzees in 15 communities and one suspected killing by bonobos. We found that males were the most frequent attackers (92% of participants) and victims (73%); most killings (66%) involved intercommunity attacks; and attackers greatly outnumbered their victims (median 8:1 ratio). Variation in killing rates was unrelated to measures of human impacts. Our results are compatible with previously proposed adaptive explanations for killing by chimpanzees, whereas the human impact hypothesis is not supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	00280836
DOI:	10.1038/nature13727