↓ Skip to main content

Intergroup encounters in Verreaux’s sifakas (Propithecus verreauxi): who fights and why?

Overview of attention for article published in Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
Title
Intergroup encounters in Verreaux’s sifakas (Propithecus verreauxi): who fights and why?
Published in
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, March 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00265-016-2105-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Flávia Koch, Johannes Signer, Peter M. Kappeler, Claudia Fichtel

Abstract

Individuals living in groups have to achieve collective action for successful territorial defense. Because conflicts between neighboring groups always involve risks and costs, individuals must base their decision to participate in a given conflict on an evaluation of the trade-off between potential costs and benefits. Since group members may differ in motivation to engage in group encounters, they exhibit different levels of participation in conflicts. In this study, we investigated factors influencing participation in intergroup encounters in Verreaux's sifakas (Propithecus verreauxi), a group-living primate from Madagascar. Over a period of 12 months, we studied eight adjacent sifaka groups in Kirindy Forest. We observed 71 encounters between known neighboring groups in which adult females and males participated equally as often. No individual participated in every encounter, and non-participation occurred more often in larger groups. Females participated less often in encounters when they had dependent infants, presumably to reduce the risk of infanticide. Male participation was influenced by social status: dominant males participated in most encounters, whereas males with fewer opportunities to reproduce participated less often, hence male participation is influenced by the incentive of maintaining access to females. The number of actively participating individuals in the opponent group positively influenced the participation in both sexes. Thus, sifakas seem to decide joining a given encounter opportunistically, most likely based on a combination of individual incentives and the actual circumstance of each encounter, suggesting that the complexity in intergroup relationships appears to be the product of decisions made by each individual group member. Cooperation among group-living animals is often challenged by collective action problems resulting from individual differences in interests in contributing to collective behaviors. Intergroup encounters involve distinguished costs and benefits for each individual despite being in the same social group. Therefore, encounters between groups offer a good opportunity to investigate individual participation in collective action. In this study, we investigate the influence of different incentives on individual participation in intergroup encounters in wild Malagasy primate, Verreaux's sifakas. We propose a novel approach that takes into account the variable circumstances of each conflict, such as the number of individuals fighting in both groups as a predictor for participation. We believe that our study not only provides novel data on wild sifakas, but it also offers new perspectives for the interpretation of intergroup relationships in other taxa.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
Senegal 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
India 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 94 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 26%
Student > Master 15 15%
Researcher 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 22 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 45%
Environmental Science 9 9%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 3%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 31 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2016.
All research outputs
#2,478,943
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
#466
of 3,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,141
of 302,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology
#10
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 302,506 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.