Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-l4ctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-06T14:14:14.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Artificial colour treatment mediates aggression among unfamiliar vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops): a model for introducing primates with colourful sexual skin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

MS Gerald ,
A Weiss  and
JE Ayala
MS Gerald*
Affiliation:
Cayo Santiago, Caribbean Primate Research Center, PO Box 906, Punta Santiago, Puerto Rico 00741, USA University of Puerto Rico, Department of Medicine, Medical Sciences Campus, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00936-5067, USA
A Weiss
Affiliation:
The University of Edinburgh, School of Philosophy, Psychology, and the Language Sciences, Department of Psychology, 7 George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JZ, Scotland, UK
JE Ayala
Affiliation:
Cayo Santiago, Caribbean Primate Research Center, PO Box 906, Punta Santiago, Puerto Rico 00741, USA Antioch New England Graduate School, Keene, New Hampshire 03431-3552, USA
*
* Correspondence and request for reprints: mgerald@rcm.upr.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aggression and agonism typically accompany the initial interactions exchanged between unfamiliar primates. As a part of a larger study examining the social function of scrotal colour in vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus), this paper offers experimental data to show how scrotal colour can influence aggression, and how artificial colour treatment can be used as an effective tool for managing aggression. Study animals were 81 vervet monkey pairs composed of 162 similarly-sized, unfamiliar adult males originating from non-adjacent parishes in Barbados. Non-contact and contact aggression were recorded on a continuous basis during 90 minute introductions. The main effects of the Test male scrotal colour, Stimulus male colour, and the interaction of the Test male and Stimulus male colours were not significant predictors of non-contact aggression. The effects of scrotal colouration of the Test male and Stimulus male were not significant predictors of contact aggression either, but there was a significant interaction effect; pairs of males with similar scrotal colour engaged in contact aggression more often than pairs of males differing in colour. Painting the scrotum dark led to more aggression when these males were paired with dark coloured males and less aggression when these males were paired with pale coloured males. These findings suggest a practical and inexpensive means of reducing the likelihood of aggression when introducing new animals. These results may also be applicable for other taxa that have colourful sexual skin, such as mandrills, drills, talapoins, patas monkeys, and many guenon species.

Keywords

aggressionanimal welfarecolourintroductionprimatessex skin
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , November 2006 , pp. 363 - 369
Copyright
© 2006 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Altmann, J 1974 Observational study of behavior: Sampling methods. Behaviour 49: 227–263CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersson, M 1994 Sexual selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press, USACrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaver, BV 1989 Environmental enrichment for laboratory animals. ILAR News 31(2): 5–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bercovitch, FB 1996 Testicular function and scrotal color in patas monkeys. Journal of Zoology 239: 93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, IS and Mason, WA 1963 Group formation by rhesus monkeys. Animal Behaviour 11: 28–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, IS, Gordon, TP and Rose, RM 1974 Factors influencing the expression of aggression during introductions to rhesus monkey groups. In: Holloway, RE (ed) Primate Aggression, Territoriality, and Xenophobia pp 211–240. (NY) Academic Press: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Bloomsmith, A and Maple, T 1987 Management and husbandry of African monkeys in captivity. In: Zucker, EL (ed) Comparative Behavior of African Monkeys pp 197–234. Alan R Liss Inc: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Bowlig, N 1978 Communicative signals and social behaviour of some African monkeys: A comparative study. Primates 19: 61–99Google Scholar
Chamove, AS 1978 Therapy of isolate rhesus: Different partners and social behavior. Child Development 49: 43–50CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collias, NE 1943 Statistical analysis of factors which make for success in initial encounters between hens. American Naturalist 72: 519–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crockett, CM, Bowers, CL, Bowden, DM and Sackett, GP 1994 Sex differences in compatibility of pair-housed adult long-tailed macaques. American Journal of Primatology 32: 73–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixson, AF, Bossi, T and Wickings, EJ 1993 Male dominance and genetically determined reproductive success in the mandrill (Mandrillus sphinx). Primates 24: 525–532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fairbanks, LA, McGuire, MT and Kerber, W 1978 Effects of group size, composition, introduction technique and cage apparatus on aggression during group formation in rhesus monkeys. Psychological Reports 42: 327–33CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fairbanks, LA and McGuire, MT 1987 Mother-infant relationships in vervet monkeys: Response to new adult males. International Journal of Primatology 8: 351–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, JA, Schaffner, CM, Shepard, RE and Miller, ME 1995 Familiarity with intruders modulates agonism towards outgroup conspecifics in Wied's black-tufted-ear marmoset (Callithrix kuhli): Primates, (Callitrichidae) Ethology 99(1): 24–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, J 1994 Introducing Unfamiliar Chimpanzees to a Group or Partner. Lab Primate Newsletter 33(1): 5–6Google Scholar
Gartlan, JS and Brain, CK 1968 Ecology and social variability in Cercopithecus aethiops and Cercopithecus mitis. In: Jay, PC (ed) Social Communication among Primates pp 253–292. Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Geist, V 1966 The evolution of horn-like organs. Behaviour 27: 175–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerald, MS 1999 Scrotal color in vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus): the signal functions and potential proximate mechanisms of color variation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, USAGoogle Scholar
Gerald, MS 2001 Primate colour reveals social status and predicts aggressive outcome. Animal Behaviour 61 (3): 559-66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerald, MS, Bernstein, J, Hinkson, R and Fosbury, R 2001 A formal method for objective assessment of primate color. American Journal of Primatology 53: 79–853.0.CO;2-N>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gerald, MS 2003 How color may guide the primate world: Possible relationships between sexual selection and sexual dichromatism. In: Jones, CB (ed) Sexual selection and reproductive competition in primates: New perspectives and directions pp 141–172. American Society of Primatologists: Norman, OK, USAGoogle Scholar
Higley, JD, Mehlman, PT, Poland, RE, Taub, DM, Vickers, J, Suomi, SJ and Linnoila, M 1996 CSF, Testosterone and 5-HIAA correlate with different types of aggressive behaviors. Biological Psychiatry 40: 1067–1082CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Isbell, LA 1995 Seasonal and social correlates of changes in hair, skin, and scrotal condition in vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops) of Amboseli National Park, Kenya. American Journal of Primatology 36: 61–70CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnstone, RA and Norris, N 1993 Badges of status and the cost of aggression. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 32: 127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Line, SW 1987 Environmental enrichment for laboratory primates. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 190: 854–859Google ScholarPubMed
Line, SW, Markowitz, H, Morgan, KN and Strong, S 1989 Evaluation of attempts to enrich the environment of singly-caged nonhuman primates. In: Driscoll, JW (ed) Animal Care and use in Behavioral Research: Regulation, Issues, and Applications pp 103–117. Animal Welfare Information Center, National Agricultural Library: Beltsville MD, USAGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J 1982 Evolution and the Theory of Games. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendoza, SP 1993 Social conflict on first encounters. In: Mason, WA, Mendoza, SP (eds) Primate Social Conflict pp 85–110. SUNY Press: Albany, USAGoogle Scholar
Morland, HS, Suleman, MA and Tarara, EB 1992 Changes in Male-Female Interactions after Introduction of a New Adult Male in Vervet Monkey (Cercopithecus aethiops) Groups. Laboratory Primate Newsletter 31(2): 1–4Google Scholar
Novak, MA and Suomi, SJ 1988 Psychological well-being of primates in captivity. American Psychologist 43: 765–773CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parker, GA 1974 Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. Journal of Theoretical Biology 47: 223–243CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reinhardt, V 1989 Behavioral responses of unrelated adult male rhesus monkeys familiarized and paired for the purpose of environmental enrichment. American Journal of Primatology 17: 243–248CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reinhardt, V 1990 Social Enrichment for Laboratory Primates: A Critical Review. Laboratory Primate Newsletter 29(3): 7–11Google Scholar
Reinhardt, V 1991a Environmental enrichment program for caged rhesus monkeys at the Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center. In: Novak, MA and Petto, A (eds) Through the Looking Glass: Issues of Psychological Well-being in Captive Nonhuman Primates. American Psychology Association: Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Reinhardt, V 1991b Agonistic Behavior Responses of Socially Experienced, Unfamiliar Adult Male Rhesus Monkeys (Macaca mulatta) to Pairing. Laboratory Primate Newsletter 30(1): 5–7Google Scholar
Reinhardt, V, Liss, C and Stevens, C 1995 Social-housing of previously single-caged macaques: What are the options and the risks? Animal Welfare 4: 307–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhardt, V and Seelig, D 1998 Environmental Enrichment for Caged Rhesus Macaques: A Photographic Documentation. Animal Welfare Institute: Washington DC, USAGoogle Scholar
Rohwer, S 1975 The social significance of avian winter plumage variability. Evolution 29: 593–610CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rohwer, S 1977 Status signalling in Harris' sparrows. Behaviour 61: 107–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowell, TE 1988a The social system of guenons, compared with baboons, macaques and mangabeys. In: Gautier-Hion, A, Bourlière, F, Gautier, JP and Kingdon, J (eds) A Primate Radiation: Evolutionary Biology of the African Guenons pp 439–451. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
Rowell, TE 1988b Beyond the one-male group. Behaviour 104: 189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seelig, D 1998 Pair-housing Male Macaca fascicularis: A Summary. Laboratory Primate Newsletter 37(3): 14–16Google Scholar
Struhsaker, TT 1967 Behavior of vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops). University of California Publications in Zoology 82: 1–74Google Scholar
West, P and Packer, C 2002 Sexual Selection, Temperature, and the Lion's Mane. Science 297: 1339–1343CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woolverton, WL, Ator, NA, Beardsley, PM and Carroll, ME 1989 Effects of environmental condition on the psychological well-being of primates: a review of the literature. Life Sciences 44: 901–917CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed