Charting the neglected West: The social system of Guinea baboons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Primate social systems are remarkably diverse, and thus play a central role in understanding social evolution, including the biological origin of human societies. Although baboons have been prominently featured in this context, historically little was known about the westernmost member of the genus, the Guinea baboon (Papio papio). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Here, we summarize the findings from the first years of observations at the field site CRP Simenti in the Niokolo Koba National Park in Senegal. RESULTS: Guinea baboons reveal a nested multi-level social organization, with reproductive units comprising one "primary" male, one to several females, young, and occasionally "secondary" males at the base of the society. Three to five units form "parties," which team up with other parties to form a "gang." Different gangs have largely overlapping home ranges and agonistic interactions between different parties or gangs are rare. Some but not all strongly socially bonded males are highly related, and population genetic and behavioral evidence indicate female-biased dispersal. Females play an important role in intersexual bond formation and maintenance, and female tenure length varies between a few weeks to several years. DISCUSSION: While the social organization resembles that of hamadryas baboons (P. hamadryas), the social structure differs considerably, specifically in terms of low male aggressiveness and female freedom. Despite substantial differences in social organization and social structure, the acoustic structure of Guinea baboon vocalizations does not differ substantially from that of other baboon taxa. With its multi-level organization, stable bonds between males and females, as well as a high-degree of male-male cooperation and tolerance, Guinea baboons constitute an intriguing model for reconstructing human social evolution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".