Why preen others? Predictors of allopreening in parrots and corvids and comparisons to grooming in great apes

Allogrooming in primates serves not only a hygienic function, but also plays a crucial role in maintaining strong affiliative bonds between group members, which in turn, underpin the emergence of cooperative behavior. In contrast, although allopreening occurs in many avian species, we know little about its social functions. Our study addresses this issue by investigating allopreening in a broad comparative data set including six corvid and nine parrot species. We assessed whether rates of allopreening initiations, proportion of time spent allopreening, and the number of grooming partners in captive group-housed birds were comparable to patterns observed in captive chimpanzees and bonobos. While parrots and corvids were found to have similar rates of social grooming to bonobos and chimpanzees, Pan species dedicated significantly more time to social grooming. Animals in larger groups had more grooming partners, but when controlling for the number of potential partners, birds tended to have fewer grooming interaction partners than Pan species. We then investigated whether allopreening in parrots and corvids was predicted by behavioral markers of affiliative social bonds (close physical proximity, active feeding, and low levels of agonistic behavior). Results revealed that providing allopreening to a partner was significantly predicted by often being in close proximity, but not engagement in active feeding or agonistic behavior. We examined the region allopreened in a subset of species and found that preening a partner's head was predicted by both close physical proximity and active feeding, while body allopreening was only predicted by close physical proximity. Head preening may confer more hygienic benefits to recipients, and thus, may be more selectively provided to valued partners. Results support the hypothesis that allopreening in corvids and parrots helps maintain social bonds with an individual's most important social partners, showing some similarities to allogrooming in primates.     

Marmoset monkeys evaluate third-party reciprocity

Many non-human primates have been observed to reciprocate and to understand reciprocity in one-to-one social exchanges. A recent study demonstrated that capuchin monkeys are sensitive to both third-party reciprocity and violation of reciprocity; however, whether this sensitivity is a function of general intelligence, evidenced by their larger brain size relative to other primates, remains unclear. We hypothesized that highly pro-social primates, even with a relatively smaller brain, would be sensitive to others'' reciprocity. Here, we show that common marmosets discriminated between human actors who reciprocated in social exchanges with others and those who did not. Monkeys accepted rewards less frequently from non-reciprocators than they did from reciprocators when the non-reciprocators had retained all food items, but they accepted rewards from both actors equally when they had observed reciprocal exchange between the actors. These results suggest that mechanisms to detect unfair reciprocity in third-party social exchanges do not require domain-general higher cognitive ability based on proportionally larger brains, but rather emerge from the cooperative and pro-social tendencies of species, and thereby suggest this ability evolved in multiple primate lineages.     

Reciprocity explains food sharing in humans and other primates independent of kin selection and tolerated scrounging: a phylogenetic meta-analysis

Helping, i.e. behaviour increasing the fitness of others, can evolve when directed towards kin or reciprocating partners. These predictions have been tested in the context of food sharing both in human foragers and non-human primates. Here, we performed quantitative meta-analyses on 32 independent study populations to (i) test for overall effects of reciprocity on food sharing while controlling for alternative explanations, methodological biases, publication bias and phylogeny and (ii) compare the relative effects of reciprocity, kinship and tolerated scrounging, i.e. sharing owing to costs imposed by others. We found a significant overall weighted effect size for reciprocity of r = 0.20–0.48 for the most and least conservative measure, respectively. Effect sizes did not differ between humans and other primates, although there were species differences in in-kind reciprocity and trade. The relative effect of reciprocity in sharing was similar to those of kinship and tolerated scrounging. These results indicate a significant independent contribution of reciprocity to human and primate helping behaviour. Furthermore, similar effect sizes in humans and primates speak against cognitive constraints on reciprocity. This study is the first to use meta-analyses to quantify these effects on human helping and to directly compare humans and other primates.     

Social Dimensions of the Human–Avian Bond: Parrots and Their Persons

Though birds are among the most popular companion animals in the United States, little scholarly research has focused on the human– companion parrot relationship. This study uses an ethnographic approach and qualitative analysis to examine the parrot–pet owner relationship. Two and onehalf weeks of ethnographic fieldwork were carried out in a veterinary clinic specializing in avian and exotic medicine. These observations complement the results of quantitative data and qualitative analysis of texts from questionnaires completed by 100 parrot owners outside the clinic. Both textual analysis and observations in the veterinary clinic revealed some interesting insights into the social dimensions of the human–companion parrot relationship, which was rated superior to that of cats and dogs by some bird owners. Various patterns of human–avian interactions emerged from the data, including childhood experience with birds, affection and physical contact with birds, birds as family members and the nature of the human–parrot bond, infantilization (delayed weaning and parrot as child surrogate), anthropomorphism (celebration of holidays, diet, death and spirituality, and misinterpretation of bird behavior), intersubjectivity and cognition, and anthropocentrism (bird as object). Misinterpretation of bird behavior and failure to recognize the unique physiological and social needs of their species may lead to impaired welfare. On the other hand, according the bird a social status as cherished family member, may enhance their welfare. In addition, other factors are considered that may enhance or detract from the welfare of companion parrots. In a discussion of hypotheses regarding the human–pet bond, it is concluded that the data presented by this study best support the social support hypothesis.     

Acute changes in social composition and agonistic behavior in male vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus)

Among nonhuman primates the composition of social groups influences the interactions of group members. We assessed the effects of acute changes in social composition on behavior among 15 adult male vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus). Subjects were observed in their basal social groups which comprised 3 adult males, 2–4 adult females, and offspring; and in two subgroups consisting of either two or three adult males. Agonism and vigilance increased in smaller groups relative to basal conditions, while subjects in two-male groups displayed more aggression than those in three-male groups. These findings suggest that, among male vervet monkeys, acute disruption of stable social groups increases aggressive behavior, and that the amount of agonism is influenced by the composition of the consequent subgroups. © 1992 Wiley-Liss, Inc.