Male social bonds: strength and quality among co-resident white-faced capuchin monkeys (Cebus capucinus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social relationships among immigrant same-sex co-residents have received relatively little attention, particularly for species where males are the dispersing sex. White-faced capuchins ( Cebus capucinus ) are unusual in that immigrant males form cooperative alliances with co-resident males during intergroup encounters, and also have affiliative and tolerant intragroup relationships. We collected approx. 3341 h of focal animal data on 25 adult and subadult males in five groups of wild Cebus capucinus in the Santa Rosa Sector, Costa Rica, across three distinct field seasons. Using generalized linear mixed models, we examined the influence of number of co-resident males, group socionomic sex ratio, dominance status and age, and past parallel dispersal on social bond strength (i.e., proximity, contact rest, grooming, preferred grooming partners) and quality (i.e., grooming reciprocity) for 47 unique male–male dyads. Overall, dyads that included an alpha male had the weakest and least equitable bonds, while dyads composed of subordinate males had the strongest and most equitable bonds, with subordinate subadult peers being most likely to form preferred relationships. Several measures of bond strength and quality were highest among dyads in groups with few males and low socionomic sex (female-to-male) ratios. Dyad partners who had previously engaged in parallel dispersal had slightly better bonds than those that did not, suggesting that kinship and/or familiarity may be important. Our results indicate that within groups, male relationships are influenced by power asymmetry, partner availability, and dyad relationship history.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".