With the exception of one study in captive bonobos and one in wild bonobos, there has been no study examining body site preferences in great apes. It is generally suggested that groomees expose relatively invulnerable sites of their body (e.g., back and tail) in order to protect the more vulnerable parts (e.g., face and front) and to avoid eye contact with potentially risky partners, thus reducing the chance of receiving harmful aggression. radiata) groomed in face-to-face positions. nemestrina) groomed the back areas more, while more tolerant bonnet macaques ( M. Finally, comparisons between closely related species showed that the more despotic pigtail macaques ( M. Moreover, when grooming occurs following a tense situation, such as an attack or when there were signs of tension, individuals performed more face-to-back grooming. For example, in monkey species, low-ranking groomees tend to expose body sites which are relatively less vulnerable, while frequent grooming partners (e.g., individuals with strong social bonds) prefer to groom the more vulnerable face. Grooming site preference is not only influenced by the amount of ectoparasites, but also by different social variables such as the dominance rank between individuals or their levels of affiliation and social tolerance. Interestingly, in wild baboons and langurs, solitary males were found to be heavily infested with ectoparasites compared to their socially living conspecifics, and in these solitary males the highest concentration of ectoparasites was found on body sites that were inaccessible to self-grooming. Body site preferences were found to be correlated with the distribution of louse eggs in Japanese macaques ( Macaca fuscata), with individuals receiving more grooming on body sites where the louse eggs were the most abundant.
Studies have found that the distributions of body sites for social grooming and self-grooming differ and are complementary in several nonhuman primate species: animals direct more social grooming to body sites that are inaccessible to self-grooming. While future studies should expand their scope to include more populations per condition, our preliminary 2 by 2 comparison study highlights the influence of (i) species-specific social differences such as social tolerance, social attention and facial communication, and (ii) socioenvironmental constraints such as risk of predation, spatial crowding and levels of hygiene, that might be the two important factors determining the grooming patterns in two Pan species.īody site preferences have been relatively well studied in monkey species in order to investigate the function of social grooming. Moreover, captive individuals were found to groom facing one another more often than wild ones, whereas wild individuals groomed the back and in face-to-back positions more.
Results showed that bonobos groomed the head, the front and faced each other more often than chimpanzees, while chimpanzees groomed the back, anogenitals and more frequently in face-to-back positions. chimpanzees) and environment-specific differences (captivity vs. This study aimed to explore whether body site and body orientation preferences during social grooming show species-specific differences (bonobos vs. However, studies on this topic mainly come from monkey species, with almost no report on great apes. They are not only influenced by the amount of ectoparasites, but also by different social variables such as the dominance rank between individuals or their levels of affiliation. Grooming site preferences have been relatively well studied in monkey species in order to investigate the function of social grooming.
0 kommentar(er)
