4.5 Article

Female defensibility in small troops of Japanese macaques vis-a-vis nontroop males and copulation on the periphery of the troop

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY
卷 28, 期 1, 页码 73-96

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10764-006-9109-1

关键词

copulation on the periphery of the troop; female choice; Japanese macaque; nontroop males; small troops

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

I provide data compiled over 4 yr on the mating behavior in small troops of wild Japanese macaques on Yakushima Island. The key parameters are the number of sexually receptive females, the number of nontroop males (NTMs), and copulation on the periphery of the troop. I analyzed the following aspects: 1) changes in the proportion of copulation with high-ranking males (HRMs) and NTMs, 2) variations in factors such as fluctuation in the number of sexually receptive females and troop males and their effects on the number of visiting NTMs, 3) the effect of attempted interruption of mounting series by other males, and 4) some aspects of copulation on the periphery of the troop. Throughout the study, 56 % of the total number of females mated most frequently with the a-male in a single mating season. However, the relative mating success of HRMs varied over the years and between individuals. The number of visiting NTMs varied depending on the number of receptive females and troop males. Females tended to mate with the NTMs when the -1, appeared around their troops. The direct effect of interruption of the mounting series by other males is equivocal. The females mated with the low-ranking males (LRMs) and NTMs on the periphery of the troop, which increased the possibility of mounting series ending with ejaculation. Females actively sought opportunities for copulation on the periphery of the troop by moving there or initiating close proximity with LRMs and NTMs there. On Yakushima Island, the mating success of HRMs was not always as high as that predicted by the priority of access model. The injury status of the HRM,

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据