![]() ![]() In the visual domain, primates use a range of facial displays and body part movements as communication signals, sometimes combined with tactile components. ![]() Active scent marking and self-anointment (applying scent-bearing substances onto a substrate or body) are notable exceptions, but in many cases it is unclear whether olfactory cues qualify as proper communication signals. One difficulty with research on olfactory communication is that it is often unclear whether scent-bearing substances are actively and strategically released into the environment, or whether they are mere by-products of general metabolic processes. Generally, olfactory cues play important roles in stating claims over resources and displaying individual characteristics, such as reproductive state, social rank, immuno-compatibility, and other genetic traits (Wedekind et al. During conflicts, males rub their tails across their wrist and chest glands before waving them at each other (Jolly 1966). Another remarkable example is the ‘stink fights' of male ring-tailed lemurs. An interesting human example is women apparently influencing each other's ovulation through odourless cues (Stern & McClintock 1998). Nevertheless, probably all primates secrete scents that influence others. Olfaction is one of the least researched modalities, partly because it is difficult to measure and manipulate olfactory cues, especially in the wild. Primate communication takes place in all major modalities. Honest signalling prevails because of sceptical receivers. Moreover, primates can learn to ignore unreliable signallers (Cheney & Seyfarth 1988), suggesting that ‘reputation' acts as a further safeguard against dishonest signalling. It has also been argued that, in primates, individuals know and need each other and thus gain little from deception (Silk et al. Why is dishonest signalling not more common? One solution has been given by Zahavi's (1975) ‘handicap principle', which states that receivers will only attend to signals that are difficult to fake by low-quality or poorly motivated individuals. In general, however, primates rarely produce such dishonest signals, or ‘cry wolf'. As a result, other group members run to safety, which then gives the caller a foraging advantage (Wheeler 2009). Monkeys sometimes produce terrestrial predator alarms when competing over food, even though no predator is around. However, other animals with complex social behaviour, such as dolphins, also show sophisticated communication skills, suggesting that complex communication is not limited to primates (Janik 2009). Most primates live in groups in which members know each other individually and maintain multifaceted social relations factors which are thought to favour the evolution of advanced communication skills (McComb & Semple 2005). Is Primate Communication More Complex Compared to Other Groups of Animals? Communication signals have thus evolved partly to be psychologically effective on receivers (Guilford & Dawkins 1991). For example, chimpanzees sometimes react with pilo-erection (bristling of hair) during conflicts, which makes them appear bigger and more dangerous and conveys their willingness to escalate (van Hooff 1973). To this end, they use a range of different signals, many of which have directly evolved as ritualised abbreviations of more basic behavioural or physiological processes. ![]() Like other animals, primates communicate to satisfy their biological and social needs, such as avoiding predators, interacting with other group members, or maintaining cohesion during travel. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |