Abstract
Matrilineal dominance systems, which characterize several species of cercopithecines, are determined largely by the patterning of third-party aggressive interventions in conflicts. Although the role of interventions in structuring rank relations has received much attention, very few studies have dealt specifically with the development of intervention behavior. In other words,most studies have focused on the interventions received and their effect on the recipients rather than on the interventions performed and the goals of the interveners. We analyzed the intervention behavior of 10 juvenile females in a colony of 40 Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata)housed at the University of Montreal Laboratory of Behavioral Primatology. The analysis of 749 interventions performed by the juveniles over their first 4 years and 2425 interventions received over the same period reveals that (1) juvenile females intervened selectively against females ranking below their mother, (2) they began to intervene at about the same time that they began to challenge the latter females in dyadic contests, (3) they sided with females as well as with males against these females, (4) juvenile interveners incurred little risks in terms of aggressive retaliation from their targets, (5) they derived immediate benefits in terms of conflicts won over stronger targets, (6) interventions often did not take place when the possible recipients needed support, and (7) interveners did not conform to a pattern of mutually preferential support. These results support the view that interventions by juveniles are selfish (vs altruistic) and constitute a low-cost and effective means to target and to outrank prospectively subordinate females.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bercovitch, F. B. (1988). Coalitions, cooperation and reproductive tactics among adult male baboons.Anim. Behav. 36: 1198–1209.
Berman, C. M. (1980). Early agonistic experience and rank acquisition among free-ranging infant rhesus monkeys.Int. J. Primatol. 1: 153–170.
Boyd, R. (1992). The evolution of reciprocity when conditions vary. In Harcourt, A. H., and de Waal, F. B. M. (eds.),Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and Other Animals, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 473–489.
Chapais, B. (1983). Dominance, relatedness and the structure of female relationships in rhesus monkeys. In Hinde, R. A. (ed.),Primate Social Relationships: An Integrated Approach, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 208–217.
Chapais, B. (1988a). Experimental matrilineal inheritance of rank in female Japanese macaques.Anim. Behav. 36: 1025–1037.
Chapais, B. (1988b). Rank maintenance in female Japanese macaques: Experimental evidence for social dependency.Behaviour 104: 41–59.
Chapais, B. (1992). The role of alliances in the social inheritance of rank among female primates. In Harcourt, A. H., and de Waal, F. B. M. (eds.),Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and other Animals, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 29–60.
Chapais, B. (1995). Alliances as a means of competition in primates: Evolutionary, developmental, and cognitive aspects.Yrbk. Phys. Anthropol. 38: 115–136.
Chapais, B., and Gauthier, C. (1993). Early agonistic experience and the onset of matrilineal rank acquisition in Japanese macaques. In Pereira, M. E., and Fairbanks, L. A. (eds.),Juvenile Primates: Comparative Socio-Ecology, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 246–258.
Chapais, B., and Lecomte, M. (1995). Induction of matrilineal rank instability by the alpha male in a group of Japanese macaques.Am. J. Primatol. 35: 1–14.
Chapais, B., Girard, M., and Primi, G. (1991). Non-kin alliances, and the stability of matrilineal dominance relations in Japanese macaques.Anim. Behav. 41: 481–491.
Chapais, B., Prud’homme, J., and Teijeiro, S. (1994). Dominance competition among siblings in Japanese macaques: Constraints on nepotism.Anim. Behav. 48: 1335–1347.
Cheney, D. L. (1977). The acquisition of rank and the development of reciprocal alliances among free-ranging immature baboons.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2: 303–318.
Cheney, D. L. (1983). Extra-familial alliances among vervet monkeys. In Hinde, R. A. (ed.),Primate Social Relationships: An Integrated Approach, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 278–286.
Datta, S. B. (1983a). Relative power and the acquisition of rank. In Hinde, R. A. (ed.),Primate Social Relationships: An Integrated Approach, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 93–103.
Datta, S. B. (1983b). Relative power and the maintenance of dominance. In Hinde, R. A. (ed.),Primate Social Relationships: An Integrated Approach, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 103–112.
Datta, S. B. (1983c). Patterns of agonistic interference. In Hinde, R. A. (ed.),Primate Social Relationships: An Integrated Approach, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 289–297.
Datta, S. B. (1988). The acquisition of dominance among free-ranging rhesus monkey siblings.Anim. Behav. 36: 754–772.
de Waal, F. B. M., and Luttrell, L. M. (1988). Mechanisms of social reciprocity in three primate species: Symmetrical relationship characteristics of cognition?Ethol. Sociobiol. 9: 101–118.
Fedigan, L. M. (1991). History of the Arashiyama West Japanese macaques in Texas. In Fedigan, L. M., and Asquith, P. J. (eds.),The Monkeys of Arashiyama. Thirty-Five Years of Research in Japan and the West, State University of New York Press, Albany, pp. 54–73.
Grammer, K. (1992). Intervention in conflicts among children: Contexts and consequences. In Harcourt, A. H., and de Waal, F. B. M. (eds.),Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and Other Animals, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 259–283.
Hemelrijk, C. K., and Ek, A. (1991). Reciprocity and interchange of grooming and ’support’ in captive chimpanzees.Anim. Behav. 41: 923–935.
Horrocks, J. A., and Hunte, W. (1983). Maternal rank and offspring rank in vervet monkeys: An appraisal of the mechanisms of rank acquisition.Anim. Behav. 31: 772–782.
Hunte, W., and Horrocks, J. A. (1987). Kin and non-kin interventions in the aggressive disputes of vervet monkeys.Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 20: 257–263.
Kawamura, S. (1965). Matriarchal social ranks in the Minoo-B group: A study of Japanese monkeys. In Imanishi, K., and Altmann, S. (eds.),Japanese Monkeys: A Collection of Translations, Emory University Press, Atlanta, pp. 105–112.
Kummer, H. (1967) Tripartite relations in Hamadryas baboons. In Altmann, S. A. (ed.),Social Communication Among Primates. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 63–72.
Netto, J. W., and van Hooff, J. A. R. A. M. (1986). Conflict interference and the development of dominance relationships in immatureMacaca fascicularis. In Else, J. G., and Lee, P. C. (eds.),Primate Ontogeny, Cognition and Social Behaviour, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 291–300.
NoË, R. (1990). A veto game played by baboons: A challenge to the use of the prisoner’s dilemma as a paradigm for reciprocity and cooperation.Anim. Behav. 39: 78–90.
NoË, R. (1992). Alliance formation among male baboons: Shopping for profitable partners. In Harcourt, A. H., and de Waal, F. B. M. (eds.),Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and Other Animals, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 285–322.
Pereira, M. E. (1989). Interactions of juvenile savanna baboons. II. Agonistic support and rank acquisition.Ethology 80: 152–171.
Pereira, M. E. (1992). The development of dominance relations before puberty in cercopithecine societies. In Gray, P., and Silverberg, J. (eds.),Aggression and Peacefulness in Humans and Other Primates, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 117–149.
Silk, J. B. (1982). Altruism among femaleMacaca radiata: Explanations and analysis of patterns of grooming and coalition formation.Behaviour 79: 162–187.
Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism.Q. Rev. Biol. 46: 35–57.
Walters, J. R. (1980). Interventions and the development of dominance relationships in female baboons.Folia Primatol. 34: 61–89.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Prud’homme, J., Chapais, B. Development of intervention behavior in Japanese macaques: Testing the targeting hypothesis. Int J Primatol 17, 429–443 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02736630
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02736630