Nepotistic cooperation in non-human primate groups

Darwin was struck by the many similarities between humans and other primates and believed that these similarities were the product of common ancestry. He would be even more impressed by the similarities if he had known what we have learned about primates over the last 50 years. Genetic kinship has emerged as the primary organizing force in the evolution of primate social organization and the patterning of social behaviour in non-human primate groups. There are pronounced nepotistic biases across the primate order, from tiny grey mouse lemurs (Microcebus murinus) that forage alone at night but cluster with relatives to sleep during the day, to cooperatively breeding marmosets that rely on closely related helpers to rear their young, rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) females who acquire their mother''s rank and form strict matrilineal dominance hierarchies, male howler monkeys that help their sons maintain access to groups of females and male chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) that form lasting relationships with their brothers. As more evidence of nepotism has accumulated, important questions about the evolutionary processes underlying these kin biases have been raised. Although kin selection predicts that altruism will be biased in favour of relatives, it is difficult to assess whether primates actually conform to predictions derived from Hamilton''s rule: br > c. In addition, other mechanisms, including contingent reciprocity and mutualism, could contribute to the nepotistic biases observed in non-human primate groups. There are good reasons to suspect that these processes may complement the effects of kin selection and amplify the extent of nepotistic biases in behaviour.     

灵长类比较基因组学的研究进展

随着人类和黑猩猩全基因组测序工作宣布完成,以及其他灵长类基因组测序工作的逐步开展,目前已经积累了大量的灵长类基因组数据,一个崭新的研究领域——灵长类比较基因组学应运而生。该文主要通过对人类和其他非人灵长类系统关系和基因组结构的比较,从系统进化、基因组结构和基因表达调控等方面评述该领域的研究进展,阐述人类、黑猩猩与其他非人灵长类之间的主要生物学差异,揭示人类进化的生物学机制。     

A social network analysis of primate groups

Primate social systems are difficult to characterize, and existing classification schemes have been criticized for being overly simplifying, formulated only on a verbal level or partly inconsistent. Social network analysis comprises a collection of analytical tools rooted in the framework of graph theory that were developed to study human social interaction patterns. More recently these techniques have been successfully applied to examine animal societies. Primate social systems differ from those of humans in both size and density, requiring an approach that puts more emphasis on the quality of relationships. Here, we discuss a set of network measures that are useful to describe primate social organization and we present the results of a network analysis of 70 groups from 30 different species. For this purpose we concentrated on structural measures on the group level, describing the distribution of interaction patterns, centrality, and group structuring. We found considerable variability in those measures, reflecting the high degree of diversity of primate social organizations. By characterizing primate groups in terms of their network metrics we can draw a much finer picture of their internal structure that might be useful for species comparisons as well as the interpretation of social behavior.     

Phylogenetic implications of comparative primate growth rates

Growth data from a number of species of Old and New World primates have been analyzed by calculating instantaneous relative growth rates. Species discussed are the New World species Saimiri sciureus and Saguinus nigricollis, and the Old World species Pan troglodytes and Macaca mulatta. The analysis of the perinatal growth data indicated that differences in relative growth rates are present during early periods of growth. More specifically, it was found that the closer taxonomically a species is to man the greater the deceleration of growth during the first postnatal year. It is suggested that this may be a general primate trend.     

Blood groups of macaques:a comparative study.

Distribution of the human-type and of the simian-type blood groups in rhesus, crab-eating, bonnet, pig-tailed and stump-tailed macaques revealed significant similarities and differences among these species. Human-type A--B-O blood groups cut across taxonomic lines and seem less value for taxonomic purposes than the simian-type blood groups detected by cross-reacting isoimmune rhesus monkey sera.     

The Gegenbaur Transformation: a paradigm change in comparative biology

The leading experts in the development of phylogenetic systematics, Walter Zimmermann and Willi Hennig, formulated their research program in opposition to (neo-) idealistic morphology as expounded by authors such as Wilhelm Troll and Adolf Naef. Idealistic morphology was synonymous with systematic morphology for Naef, who wanted it to be strictly kept separate and independent of phylogenetics. Naef conceded, however, that the natural system researched by systematic morphology is to be causally explained by the theory of descent with modification. Naef went on to compile a dictionary that would regulate the translation of the language of systematic morphology into the language of phylogenetics. The switch from idealistic morphology to phylogenetic morphology is paradigmatically exemplified in the two editions (1859, 1870) of Carl Gegenbaur's Grundzüge der vergleichenden Anatomie. This paper traces the development of phylogenetic systematics from Gegenbaur through the work of Adolf Naef to Walter Zimmermann and Willi Hennig. Hennig added to Naef's systematic morphology the dimension of time, which required an ontological replacement: Naef's natural system, a nested hierarchy of intensionally defined sets subject to the membership relation, was replaced by Hennig's phylogenetic system, an enkaptic hierarchy subject to the part-to-whole relation.     

The comparative method in conservation biology

The phylogenetic comparative approach is a statistical method for analyzing correlations between traits across species. Whilst it has revolutionized evolutionary biology, can it work for conservation biology? Although it is correlative, advocates of the comparative method hope that it will reveal general mechanisms in conservation, provide shortcuts for prioritizing conservation research, and enable us to predict which species will experience (or create) problems in the future. Here, we ask whether these stated management goals are being achieved. We conclude that comparative methods are stimulating research into the ecological mechanisms underlying conservation, and are providing information for preemptive screening of problem species. But comparative analyses of extinction risk to date have tended to be too broad in scope to provide shortcuts to conserving particular endangered species. Correlates of vulnerability to conservation problems are often taxon, region and threat specific, so models must be narrowly focused to be of maximum practical use.