Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Dec;90(12):2819-2833.
doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.13584. Epub 2021 Sep 6.

Implementing social network analysis to understand the socioecology of wildlife co-occurrence and joint interactions with humans in anthropogenic environments

Affiliations

Implementing social network analysis to understand the socioecology of wildlife co-occurrence and joint interactions with humans in anthropogenic environments

Krishna N Balasubramaniam et al. J Anim Ecol. 2021 Dec.

Abstract

Human population expansion into wildlife habitats has increased interest in the behavioural ecology of human-wildlife interactions. To date, however, the socioecological factors that determine whether, when or where wild animals take risks by interacting with humans and anthropogenic factors still remains unclear. We adopt a comparative approach to address this gap, using social network analysis (SNA). SNA, increasingly implemented to determine human impact on wildlife ecology, can be a powerful tool to understand how animal socioecology influences the spatiotemporal distribution of human-wildlife interactions. For 10 groups of rhesus, long-tailed and bonnet macaques (Macaca spp.) living in anthropogenically impacted environments in Asia, we collected data on human-macaque interactions, animal demographics, and macaque-macaque agonistic and affiliative social interactions. We constructed 'human co-interaction networks' based on associations between macaques that interacted with humans within the same time and spatial locations, and social networks based on macaque-macaque allogrooming behaviour, affiliative behaviours of short duration (agonistic support, lip-smacking, silent bare-teeth displays and non-sexual mounting) and proximity. Pre-network permutation tests revealed that, within all macaque groups, specific individuals jointly took risks by repeatedly, consistently co-interacting with humans within and across time and space. GLMMs revealed that macaques' tendencies to co-interact with humans was positively predicted by their tendencies to engage in short-duration affiliative interactions and tolerance of conspecifics, although the latter varied across species (bonnets>rhesus>long-tailed). Male macaques were more likely to co-interact with humans than females. Neither macaques' grooming relationships nor their dominance ranks predicted their tendencies to co-interact with humans. Our findings suggest that, in challenging anthropogenic environments, less (compared to more) time-consuming forms of affiliation, and additionally greater social tolerance in less ecologically flexible species with a shorter history of exposure to humans, may be key to animals' joint propensities to take risks to gain access to resources. For males, greater exploratory tendencies and less energetically demanding long-term life-history strategies (compared to females) may also influence such joint risk-taking. From conservation and public health perspectives, wildlife connectedness within such co-interaction networks may inform interventions to mitigate zoonosis, and move human-wildlife interactions from conflict towards coexistence.

Keywords: behavioural ecology; comparative studies; conservation behaviour; human-wildlife interactions; nonhuman primates; social network analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

REFERENCES

    1. Adams, J., Faust, K., & Lovasi, G. S. (2012). Capturing context: Integrating spatial and social network analyses. Social Networks, 34, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2011.10.007
    1. Albery, G. F., Kirkpatrick, L., Firth, J. A., & Bansal, S. (2020). Unifying spatial and social network analysis in disease ecology. Journal of Animal Ecology, 90, 45-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.13356
    1. Altmann, J. (1974). Observational study of behavior. Behaviour, 49, 227-267.
    1. Aureli, F., Preston, S. D., & de Waal, F. (1999). Heart rate responses to social interactions in free-moving rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta): A pilot study. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 113(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.113.1.59
    1. Balasubramaniam, K. N., Beisner, B. A., Vandeleest, J., Atwill, E., & McCowan, B. (2016). Social buffering and contact transmission: Network connections have beneficial and detrimental effects among captive rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). PeerJ, 4, e2630. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2630

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources