Self-interest precludes prosocial juice provisioning in a free choice group experiment in bonobos
- PMID: 35947244
- DOI: 10.1007/s10329-022-01008-x
Self-interest precludes prosocial juice provisioning in a free choice group experiment in bonobos
Abstract
Previous studies on prosociality in bonobos have reported contrasting results, which might partly be explained by differences in experimental contexts. In this study, we implement a free choice group experiment in which bonobos can provide fruit juice to their group members at a low cost for themselves. Four out of five bonobos passed a training phase and understood the setup and provisioned fruit juice in a total of 17 dyads. We show that even in this egalitarian group with a shallow hierarchy, the majority of pushing was done by the alpha female, who monopolized the setup and provided most juice to two adult females, her closest social partners. Nonetheless, the bonobos in this study pushed less frequently than the chimpanzees in the original juice-paradigm study, suggesting that bonobos might be less likely than chimpanzees to provide benefits to group members. Moreover, in half of the pushing acts, subjects obtained juice for themselves, suggesting that juice provisioning was partly driven by self-regarding behavior. Our study indicates that a more nuanced view on the prosocial food provisioning nature of bonobos is warranted but based on this case study, we suggest that the observed sex differences in providing food to friends corresponds with the socio-ecological sex difference in cooperative interactions in wild and zoo-housed bonobos.
Keywords: Food provisioning; Friends; Partner choice; Relationship quality; Selfish.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Japan Monkey Centre.
Similar articles
-
Adult bonobos show no prosociality in both prosocial choice task and group service paradigm.PeerJ. 2022 Feb 1;10:e12849. doi: 10.7717/peerj.12849. eCollection 2022. PeerJ. 2022. PMID: 35178297 Free PMC article.
-
Factors underlying party size differences between chimpanzees and bonobos: a review and hypotheses for future study.Primates. 2009 Jul;50(3):197-209. doi: 10.1007/s10329-009-0141-6. Epub 2009 Apr 8. Primates. 2009. PMID: 19353234 Review.
-
Tolerant food sharing and reciprocity is precluded by despotism among bonobos but not chimpanzees.Am J Phys Anthropol. 2010 Sep;143(1):41-51. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.21288. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2010. PMID: 20310060
-
Social play in bonobos (Pan paniscus) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): Implications for natural social systems and interindividual relationships.Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006 Mar;129(3):418-26. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.20289. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006. PMID: 16323189
-
Female contributions to the peaceful nature of bonobo society.Evol Anthropol. 2011 Jul-Aug;20(4):131-42. doi: 10.1002/evan.20308. Evol Anthropol. 2011. PMID: 22038769 Review.
References
-
- Amici F, Visalberghi E, Call J (2014) Lack of prosociality in great apes, capuchin monkeys and spider monkeys: convergent evidence from two different food distribution tasks. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1699 - DOI
-
- ASAB (2020) Guidelines for the treatment of animals in behavioural research and teaching. Anim Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.11.002 - DOI
-
- Bullinger AF, Burkart JM, Melis AP, Tomasello M (2013) Bonobos, Pan paniscus, chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes, and marmosets, Callithrix jacchus, prefer to feed alone. Anim Behav 85:51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.10.006 - DOI
-
- Burkart JM, Allon O, Amici F et al (2014) The evolutionary origin of human hyper-cooperation. Nat Commun 5:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5747 - DOI
-
- Cronin KA (2012) Prosocial behaviour in animals: the influence of social relationships, communication and rewards. Anim Behav 84:1085–1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.08.009 - DOI
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources