Coalition Formation by Male Vervet Monkeys (<i><scp>C</scp>hlorocebus pygerythrus</i>) in <scp>S</scp>outh <scp>A</scp>frica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Unrelated male primates frequently cohabit in bisexual groups and, despite being reproductive competitors, have been shown to cooperate in ways that are associated with reproductive success. Such coalitions between males are common in some taxa, where they can serve two primary functions – status management and improved mating opportunities – that subserve long‐ and short‐term objectives. Here, we use observational data to provide information on male coalitions in vervet monkeys ( Chlorocebus pygerythrus ), a guenon with a multimale group structure. We recorded a total of 62 coalitions from two troops across a 10‐mo period at Samara Game Reserve, South Africa. We found that males who were more frequently associated spatially and who had groomed one another were more likely to form coalitions and did so against higher‐ranking opponents. This was not linked to any evidence that coalitionary aggression provided either short‐ or long‐term reproductive benefits for the aggressors and coalitions were not restricted to the mating season. There was little evidence that particular individuals were targeted, reciprocation between partners was not observed, and recent immigrant males were not targeted disproportionately. Our data suggest that within‐group coalition formation between vervet males may represent something close to an ancestral state whereby males form ad hoc coalitions opportunistically, joining an ongoing dyadic contest to target an opponent without facing the possible risks of dyadic contest, such as a greater chance of injury.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.005 |
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 teacher head, 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".