Humans have been captivated by baboons for thousands of years: from ancient Egypt, where the god of wisdom, Thoth, was depicted with a baboon head, to the mid-19^th century when Charles Darwin remarked, "He who understands baboon would do more towards metaphysics than Locke" (Darwin, 1838). At the beginning of the 20^th century, the South African naturalist Eugene Marais provided one of the first detailed accounts of free-ranging baboons (Marais, 1939), and by the 1950s, baboons had become the subject of more systematic scientific enquiry, both in the field and in captivity. This was the decade that the American physical anthropologist Sherwood Washburn and his student Irven DeVore set out to investigate baboons in Kenya (Vore and Washburn, 1961). Washburn reasoned that these ground-living primates were a good model for early human adaptations because they evolved in African savannas alongside ancestral hominins. Meanwhile, increasing interest in the use of non-human primates as biomedical models for humans led to the funding in 1958 of a three-year proposal titled "Initiation and Support of Colony of Baboons" by the US National Institutes of Health, with the first group of baboons shipped to the United States from Kenya in 1960 (VandeBerg, 2009). Since then, research in captivity on baboons as a biomedical model has been complemented by extensive fieldwork on baboon populations across Africa. Knowledge of the links between health and fitness in baboons under natural circumstances, including natural levels of genotypic and phenotypic variation, appears critical to put results from captive studies into context. An understanding of the evolution and life history of these animals in the wild also allows the scientific community to assess the validity of results derived from captive populations.

While the earlier field studies set out to uncover a baboon archetype, subsequent research has revealed that there is no such thing as "the baboon". Indeed, many would argue that the value of this genus lies precisely in the substantial variation in the social systems, life histories and ecologies within and between the baboon species (see Box 1 for a glossary of specialist terms used in this article). Collectively, these characteristics make baboons an excellent model organism for investigating a range of fundamental biological processes, such as physiological and behavioral adaptation, hybridization and speciation with gene flow (Alfred and Baldwin, 2015). In this way, the baboon model constitutes an important complement to other mammalian model organisms, such as wild house mice(Mus musculus; Phifer-Rixey and Nachman, 2015) and deer mice (genus Peromyscus; Bedford and Hoekstra, 2015).

Within the primate order, all extant baboons belong to the genus Papio. The genus is part of the tribe Papionini, within the family Cercopithecidae. The fossil record and phylogeographic analyses indicate that baboons originated in southern Africa. Nuclear and mitochondrial estimates put the date of initial divergence of baboon lineages at 1.5–2.1 million years ago (Newman et al., 2004; Rogers et al., 2019; Zinner et al., 2013). At about the same time, during the Pleistocene epoch, baboons started to expand their range across sub-Saharan Africa into both northern and southern savannas.

Presently, six species are recognized: the chacma baboon (Papio ursinus), which is found in southern Africa; the yellow baboon (Papio cynocephalus), which inhabits large parts of eastern Africa; the Kinda baboon (Papio kindae), which is found in Zambia, eastern Angola, and southern DR Congo; the olive baboon (Papio anubis), whose distribution ranges from northern DR Congo to parts of Kenya and Tanzania across to Sierra Leone in the west and to Eritrea in the east; the Guinea baboon (Papio papio), which is found from Sierra Leone to Mauritania and Senegal; and the hamadryas baboon (Papio hamadryas), which inhabits parts of Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia and the south-western part of the Arabian peninsula (Figure 1). Hybrid zones are found where species' distributions come into contact.

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

While the systematic grouping into taxa within the genus Papio is well accepted on both phenotypic and genetic evidence, the taxonomic ranking is disputed. According to the biological species concept (Mayr, 1963), all taxa would be considered one polytypic species (Papio hamadryas) because where they meet in the wild they interbreed freely, producing viable and fertile hybrid offspring. Given that the different taxa vary substantially in appearance, behavior, and the characteristics of their society, we follow the phylogenetic species concept (Cracraft, 1983), and refer to the different taxa as "species".

All baboon species are anatomically and morphologically well adapted to a quadrupedal terrestrial lifestyle (Fleagle, 2013). They have dog-like muzzles and males have large canine teeth. Depending on the species, body mass varies between 17 and 30 kg for adult males, and between 10 and 15 kg for females, resulting in a sexual dimorphism in mass ranging between 1.55 and 2.20 (Anandam et al., 2013; Fischer et al., 2017; Swedell, 2011).

The species differ notably in their fur color, body size and sexually selected characteristics, such as the distinct capes which are most pronounced in Guinea and hamadryas baboons but also present in olive baboons. Females of all species develop sexual swellings of the anogenital region when they are fertile. These swelling change throughout the menstrual cycle, such that maximum swelling typically coincides with ovulation (Higham et al., 2008). The size and shape of the swellings varies considerably among species (Figure 2; Petersdorf et al., 2019).

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

All baboon species are largely terrestrial during the day but retreat to sleeping trees or cliffs during the night. They exhibit great ecological flexibility, allowing them to occupy habitats including semi-deserts grasslands, woodland savannas, humid forests, and Afroalpine grasslands over 3,000 meters above sea level (Chala et al., 2019; Fuchs et al., 2018). Baboons eat a broad range of foods, although their diet mainly consists of plants, including fruit, seeds, leaves, and roots. They also eat insects and other arthropods and, occasionally, kill small antelopes, hares, rodents, birds and smaller monkeys (Goffe and Fischer, 2016; Swedell, 2011).

Phenotypic differences between species are well recognized (Jolly, 1993), and based on their molecular phylogeny, baboons are generally split in two major groups: north and south (Dunn et al., 2013; Frost et al., 2003). However, genetic evidence reveals a complex evolutionary history of the genus Papio. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA yields a phylogeny that includes several major haplogroups or clades – groups of individuals who belong to a specific mitochondrial lineage. These haplogroups reflect the geographic origin of the respective specimens better than their external phenotypes or taxonomic classification, making species appear to be paraphyletic and polyphyletic when mapped onto the mitochondrial phylogeny (Zinner et al., 2009; Zinner et al., 2011).

Comparisons of whole genome sequences confirm the six baboon species taxonomy and suggest that the initial evolutionary divergence separated a southern lineage that ultimately produced Kinda, chacma and yellow baboons, from a northern lineage that produced olive, hamadryas and Guinea baboons (Rogers et al., 2019). Ancient hybridization events appear to have affected the genetic makeup of all species. For instance, Guinea baboons most likely experienced genetic admixture with a "ghost lineage" that is probably extinct, or that is at least not represented in the sample of genomes analyzed to date (Rogers et al., 2019).

Multiple episodes of admixture and introgression have been linked to climate change and range expansion (Rogers et al., 2019; Walker et al., 2017; Wall et al., 2016; Zinner et al., 2013). Similar evolutionary mechanisms, including gene transfer by introgressive hybridization, are now recognized to have influenced the evolution of Neanderthals, Denisovans and modern humans (Green et al., 2010; Prüfer et al., 2017; Prüfer et al., 2014; Reich et al., 2010; Ackermann et al., 2019). However, the absence of genomic data from non-sapiens African hominins presently hinders our ability to ask questions about ancestral African hominin hybridization (Scerri et al., 2018; Stringer, 2016). Baboons allow us to study the impact of gene flow in an extant model.

Of particular interest for understanding baboon evolution is how changes in population density and spatial structure, such as the opening and closing of forest and other barriers, gave rise to different social systems (Jolly, 2019). The range expansion of the genus appears to be of particular relevance. Given a southern African origin, modern baboons experienced a tremendous expansion of their range, possibly linked to changes to the habitats, animal communities and climate that occurred during the Pleistocene and that gave baboons the chance to disperse into the savanna belt north of the tropical forest zone (Dolotovskaya et al., 2017; Zinner et al., 2011). Like humans and other savanna species, baboons have thus been subject of recurrent range shifts, fragmentation, and isolation and reconnection of populations (Zinner et al., 2011) – dynamics that affected baboon genetic structure and speciation (Rogers et al., 2019).

In summary, baboons can serve as a valuable model for evolutionary divergence and hybridization, triggered by climatic changes and the expansion and fragmentation of populations in the African savanna. Such analyses are also highly relevant for a better understanding of early hominins.

The six baboon species vary substantially in their social characteristics, including social organization, social style and mating patterns. Group size varies within and among species. In chacma, olive and yellow baboons, group size ranges from about a dozen up to roughly one hundred animals (Markham et al., 2015; Swedell, 2011), while hamadryas and Guinea baboons temporarily aggregate into groups of several hundreds of individuals (Patzelt et al., 2011; Swedell, 2013). Sex ratios in baboons vary too; some groups are fairly balanced, while adult females in other groups can outnumber adult males by about 10 to 1 (Swedell, 2011).

Chacma, olive, Kinda and yellow baboons – recently dubbed "COKY" baboons (Jolly, 2019) – live in multi-male-multi-female groups, in which related females constitute the stable core, while males leave the group they were born into and join another. Clear rank hierarchies among males and females can be discerned based on aggressive interactions, including threats, chases and physical aggression, as well as signals of submission. In females, related individuals (known as matrilines) typically occupy adjacent ranks. For female chacma, olive and yellow baboons, female kin constitute the most important social partners (Silk et al., 2017; Silk et al., 2010; Silk, 2003). In Kinda baboons, however, males are the most significant grooming partners for females (Petersdorf et al., 2019).

Females of all COKY species interact and mate with several males in the group. High-ranking males generally experience higher mating success than lower-ranking ones, though this rank-related mating skew is more pronounced in chacma baboons than in olive or yellow baboons (Bulger, 1993; Henzi and Barrett, 1999; Städele et al., 2019). During female receptive periods, males aggressively guard their female mating partner, resulting in sexual "consortships" (Noë and Sluijter, 1990; Smuts, 1985). Consorts may last from several hours up to several days. Consort success (and thus mating success) is often related to male dominance status (Gesquiere et al., 2011). In yellow and olive baboons, however, male coalitions may be able to take the female away from a dominant male (Noë and Sluijter, 1990; Smuts, 1985).

Male competition and aggressiveness vary considerably between species. Infanticide is frequent in some populations of chacma baboons (Palombit et al., 2001), but rare in olive, yellow and hamadryas baboons (Lemasson et al., 2008; Swedell, 2011). Lactating females often form close ties to specific males, which are often the sires of their infants (Huchard et al., 2010; Moscovice et al., 2010; Nguyen et al., 2009; Städele et al., 2019). These relationships appear to be an adaptation against infanticide by recent immigrant males (Palombit et al., 1997) and harassment by other group members (Alberts et al., 2003) as well as a form of paternal investment (Buchan et al., 2003; Huchard et al., 2013). Male alliances are absent in chacma baboons, while common in yellow and olive baboons (Noë and Sluijter, 1995). These differences in male competitive regimes are reflected in their dispersal behavior: male chacma baboons in the Okavango delta, for instance, do not emigrate from their natal group until after they are fully grown (Beehner et al., 2009), while male olive and yellow baboons often emigrate during adolescence (Alberts and Altmann, 1995; Packer et al., 1995).

Over the past decade, studies of Kinda baboons have broadened our knowledge of morphological and behavioral variation within the genus. Kinda baboons are smaller in body size, have reduced sexual dimorphism in body and canine size, and have larger relative testis volume, compared to other baboon species (Jolly, 2019). Kinda females exhibit small sexual swellings (Figure 2) and give inconspicuous calls (Petersdorf et al., 2019). Chacma females, in contrast, give loud copulation calls, which function to incite male-male competition (O'Connell and Cowlishaw, 1994).

Hamadryas baboons – in contrast to the COKY baboon species described above – live in a multi-level society with reproductive units, called "one male units" comprising one sexually active leader male, a variable number of females, and sometimes a follower male (Kummer, 1968). Associations between several one-male units constitute a clan (Abegglen, 1984); several clans and unaffiliated bachelor males form a band, the main ecological unit, and multiple bands coalesce at resources, especially sleeping sites, to form troops (Schreier and Swedell, 2009). Recent behavioral and genetic studies of hamadryas baboons show that leader and follower males tend to be maternally related, in line with the fact that they disperse only rarely. Females within a unit are also more likely to be related than expected by chance (Städele et al., 2016).

Guinea baboons also live in a multi-level society. Several units comprising a primary male, 1–6 females, young, and occasional secondary males make up parties, and 2 to 3 parties constitute a gang within a larger community (Fischer et al., 2017). Male Guinea baboons maintain strong bonds and a high degree of spatial tolerance (Fischer et al., 2017). Some, but not all males with strong bonds are highly related, suggesting that the existence of kin in the group promotes male tolerance (Patzelt et al., 2014). In striking contrast to most other baboon species, aggression between males is so rare that it is not possible to discern a dominance hierarchy with certainty (Dal Pesco and Fischer, 2018). Males engage in extended ritualized greetings that apparently function to reinforce delineations between parties and to test bonds between males (Dal Pesco and Fischer, 2018). Females freely transfer between units, parties and gangs. Female tenure with a given male may vary between weeks and years (Goffe et al., 2016). Both Guinea and hamadryas baboons exhibit female-biased dispersal (Kopp et al., 2015; Städele et al., 2015).

Note that many of the most significant differences in social behavior between species have been observed across different populations in multiple African sites, as well as in captivity. Thus, there is good evidence that the variation we describe here reflects true species differences and not just variation between populations. Yet, characterizing the variation within species in greater detail would be extremely valuable.

Despite the variation in social organization and aggressiveness between the different baboon species, there is very little variation in the vocal repertoires and call types within the genus (Hammerschmidt and Fischer, 2019). This suggests that the structure of vocal patterns is highly conserved. Because species vary in their aggressiveness and their propensity to affiliate, they also differ in the frequency with which they use signals that either relate to fighting ability or "benign intent", respectively (Faraut et al., 2019; Fischer et al., 2017).

Variation in social organization and in the nature and extent of competition over resources between baboon species is thought to result in differential selective pressure on social cognition (Amici et al., 2008; Aureli et al., 2008). To date, most of the work on baboon social knowledge has been done on chacma baboons that exhibit steep dominance hierarchies (known as despotism). A suite of studies by the American primatologists Dorothy Cheney and Robert Seyfarth and colleagues revealed that chacma baboons have sophisticated social knowledge (reviewed in Cheney and Seyfarth, 2008). For instance, the animals represent the nested hierarchical rank relationships of their group members (Bergman, 2003), track the consortship status of pairs in their group (Crockford et al., 2007), and selective deploy aid to unrelated individuals that were former grooming partners (Cheney et al., 2010).

Field playback experiments revealed that baboon species respond differently to social information. While the territorial chacma baboons respond strongly to apparent intruders (Kitchen et al., 2013), the spatially tolerant Guinea baboons paid more attention to vocalizations from co-resident group members compared to neighbors or strangers (Maciej et al., 2013). Similarly, chacma baboons respond strongly to simulated rank reversals (Bergman, 2003) or break-ups of existing consortships (Crockford et al., 2007), while Guinea baboon males were more interested in social information consistent with current social association patterns (Faraut and Fischer, 2019). The somewhat surprising responses of the Guinea baboons may be a result of the high gregariousness of the species, where deviant interaction patterns may initially be classified as "social noise" (Faraut and Fischer, 2019). In summary, these findings suggest that the content of what is represented, namely the associations between different individuals or their group memberships, appears to be relatively similar across the two species, while the value of different types of social information may vary substantially in relation to the type of society.

Over the past decade, baboon research has provided ground-breaking insights into the relationships between social status, social relationships, health and fitness measures such as offspring survival and longevity. Data from two long-term studies of baboon behavior and life history suggest that sociality enhances the fitness of females. For example, infants born to yellow baboon females who are more socially integrated have higher survival than infants of less social mothers (Archie et al., 2014; Silk, 2003); similar patterns are also seen in chacma baboons (Silk et al., 2010). As in many other primates, higher-ranking male baboons sire more offspring than other males (Altmann et al., 1996). Higher-ranking females have shorter periods before they resume menstrual cycling following birth (Gesquiere et al., 2018; Johnson, 2003; Packer et al., 1995; Smuts and Nicolson, 1989; Wasser et al., 2004), which may be linked to quicker restoration of positive energy balance (Gesquiere et al., 2018). Consistent with this, feeding on crops in olive baboons (Higham et al., 2009), or discarded human food for yellow baboons (Altmann et al., 1977), also leads to a quicker return to menstrual cycling and increases reproductive output.

A number of studies have investigated the proximate mediators of the relationship between behavior and fitness. In particular, many researchers have taken advantage of non-invasive ways to measure glucocorticoid hormones, a class of hormones known to mediate the energetic demands that accompany social and ecological challenges. Concentrations of glucocorticoid hormones increase during specific challenges that are known to threaten an individual's fitness. For example, lactating chacma females that were at risk for infanticide because a new male immigrated into the group exhibited elevated glucocorticoid hormones compared to female counterparts that were not at risk (Beehner et al., 2005). Additionally, loss of a close female relative increases glucocorticoid concentrations, and this increase may be responsible for initiating a compensatory broadening and strengthening of female grooming networks (Engh et al., 2006).

Several studies have investigated the relationship between glucocorticoid concentrations, rank and social stability in male baboons. In a long term-study of yellow baboons, high-ranking males had lower glucocorticoid concentrations, regardless of hierarchy stability, while alpha males may experience higher concentrations than expected for their rank (Gesquiere et al., 2011). Nonetheless, high-ranking yellow baboon males get sick less often and heal from wounds faster, suggesting that these high-ranking males are in better health and do not suffer trade-offs from these extra demands (Archie et al., 2012). Higher-ranking chacma baboon males also had higher glucocorticoid concentrations (Bergman et al., 2005; Kalbitzer et al., 2015).

More recently, baboons were also established as a promising model for studying the impact of sexually transmitted diseases on mating behavior. Female olive baboons in a population infected with the bacterium Treponema pallidum, a substrain of which causes syphilis in humans, copulated less with males showing clinical signs of infection (Paciência et al., 2019). These findings highlight how pathogens may impose important selective pressures in mate choice and ultimately social evolution.

The addition of data on Kinda and Guinea baboons increases the value of the baboon as a model, as we begin to have data available for all baboon species. While one aim of future analyses will be to understand the sources of variation between species, documenting similarities is equally valuable. Technological developments in genomic sequencing (Robinson et al., 2019; Rogers et al., 2019), including from non-invasively collected samples such as feces (Perry et al., 2010; Snyder-Mackler et al., 2016), have brought genomics to the forefront of baboon behavioral studies (Tung et al., 2010). Given the close phylogenetic relatedness of the six baboon species, variation in key aspects of social behavior, and the presence of hybrids displaying intermediate phenotypes within hybrid zones, investigation of causal pathways from genotype to phenotype seems particularly promising within the baboon model (Bergey et al., 2016; Jolly et al., 2008).

Formerly, research into primate behavioral genetics focused on identifying a few small specific functional polymorphisms in sequence or length, and on linking these to phenotypic variation (e.g., Kalbitzer et al., 2016). However, such studies are likely to overestimate the effect of one single aspect of genetic variation. With genotyping of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and whole-genome sequencing, primate field studies are beginning to explore the wider genomic architecture that underlies variation in social behavior (Rogers, 2018). As well as whole genome sequence data, researchers now have access to annotations for protein coding genes and transcriptomes (Robinson et al., 2019; Rogers et al., 2019; Vilgalys et al., 2019). We therefore expect an exponential increase in the number and diversity of available genomes, which will facilitate the investigation of the basis of baboon adaptations and adaptive flexibility. In conjunction with research on other model organisms, such as deer mice (Bedford and Hoekstra, 2015), such studies provide fundamental insights into the foundation of natural variation and adaptation in socially living mammals.

Baboons allow us to study the effects of accelerating anthropogenic fragmentation, loss of natural habitats and climate change in a highly adaptable primate system. For example, baboons may rapidly change how long they allocate time and energy to different behaviors or where they range, in response to human-related activities and habitat changes (Fehlmann et al., 2017; Ferreira da Silva et al., 2018). Studies of individual baboon behavior can use sophisticated GPS tracking and non-invasive genetic tools to make broad-scale inferences about movements and processes at the population level (Kopp et al., 2014; Strandburg-Peshkin et al., 2015). These inferences can then be applied to questions of how other large populations of mammals will respond to changes in their environment.

Baboons are not considered a global priority in conservation, with the exception of Guinea baboons which are categorized as Near Threatened by the IUCN (Oates et al., 2008). However, populations geographically overlapping with human communities often damage crops and infrastructure and are persecuted as pests. In some locations, people consume substantial number of baboons and sell their meat in bushmeat markets (e.g., Minhós et al., 2013). Humans and baboons often compete for space and hunting of specific individuals or even entire groups is increasingly frequent, leading to fragmented populations and local extinctions (Ferreira da Silva et al., 2018). Non-monitored populations living outside protected areas may be at a higher risk of silently disappearing. The challenge is to assess the risk of different populations and develop appropriate conservation plans.

The long-term nature of many baboon field studies has provided great insight into how populations may rise and fall rapidly in response to changes in the environment. The Amboseli Baboon Project, for example, has been running continuously for 50 years, and has documented numerous periods of relative drought or rainfall abundance (Alberts et al., 2005; Alberts and Altmann, 2011). This variation in precipitation has been linked to variation in fecundity and survival (Beehner et al., 2006; Lea et al., 2015) and to subsequent changes in population structure (Altmann et al., 1985). Periods of environmental change, and consequent boom and bust cycles in populations, are driven by both natural phenomena, such as natural aging of woodland, and anthropogenic influences, such as overgrazing by pastoralists (Alberts and Altmann, 2011). Many long-term baboon field sites also carefully collect detailed data on temperature and rainfall, as well as food availability and diseases. They also monitor the habitats in addition to the baboon populations. The breadth and scope of such data ensure that the baboon represents an outstanding model of both individual-level and population-level responses to environmental change.

Baboons constitute a fascinating and informative analog model for hominin evolution in savanna habitats, with their ongoing patterns of range expansions and contractions, and regular occurrences of hybridization where two species meet. Given the availability of long-term data and the variation in the types of societies baboons live in, they constitute an excellent test case to study the link between sociality, health, longevity and reproductive success, as well as the emergence and spread of diseases. Such studies are extremely important to put biomedical data from captive baboon studies into natural context. For future research, we propose an approach that integrates field observations and carefully designed field experiments with cutting-edge measures of genomic variation, gene expression, non-invasive endocrinology and immunology. The fact that baboons have been studied in a wide range of habitats at sites across Africa for several decades also make them an informative example to investigate how populations of large mammals respond to environmental diversity and change (see Box 2 for suggested future research questions).

This is a review article; there are no data sets associated with this article.

1. Book

   1. Abegglen JJ

   (1984)

   On Socialization in Hamadryas Baboons: A Field Study

   Bucknell University Press.

   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Ackermann RR
   2. Arnold ML
   3. Baiz MD
   4. Cahill JA
   5. Cortés‐Ortiz L
   6. Evans BJ
   7. Grant BR
   8. Grant PR
   9. Hallgrimsson B
   10. Humphreys RA
   11. Jolly CJ
   12. Malukiewicz J
   13. Percival CJ
   14. Ritzman TB
   15. Roos C
   16. Roseman CC
   17. Schroeder L
   18. Smith FH
   19. Warren KA
   20. Wayne RK
   21. Zinner D

   (2019) Hybridization in human evolution: insights from other organisms

   Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 28:189–209.

   https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21787

   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Alberts SC
   2. Watts HE
   3. Altmann J

   (2003) Queuing and queue-jumping: long-term patterns of reproductive skew in male savannah baboons, Papio cynocephalus

   Animal Behaviour 65:821–840.

   https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2003.2106

   • Google Scholar
4. Book

   1. Alberts SC
   2. Hollister-Smith JA
   3. Mututua RS
   4. Sayialel SN
   5. Muruthi PM
   6. Kinyua Warutere J
   7. Altmann J

   (2005) Seasonality and long-term change in a savanna environment

   In: Brockmann D. K, van Schaik C. P, editors. Seasonality in Primates. Cambridge University Press. pp. 157–195.

   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511542343.007

   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Alberts SC
   2. Altmann J

   (1995) Balancing costs and opportunities: dispersal in male baboons

   The American Naturalist 145:279–306.

   https://doi.org/10.1086/285740

   • Google Scholar
6. Book

   1. Alberts SC
   2. Altmann J

   (2011) The Amboseli Baboon Research Project: 40 Years of Continuity and Change

   In: Kappeler P, Watts D, editors. Long-Term Field Studies of Primates. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 261–287.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22514-7_12

   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Alfred J
   2. Baldwin IT

   (2015) New opportunities at the wild frontier

   eLife 4:e06956.

   https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06956

   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Altmann J
   2. Altmann SA
   3. Hausfater G
   4. McCuskey SA

   (1977) Life history of yellow baboons: physical development, reproductive parameters, and infant mortality

   Primates 18:315–330.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02383111

   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Altmann J
   2. Hausfater G
   3. Altmann SA

   (1985) Demography of amboseli baboons, 1963-1983

   American Journal of Primatology 8:113–125.

   https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.1350080204

   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Altmann J
    2. Alberts SC
    3. Haines SA
    4. Dubach J
    5. Muruthi P
    6. Coote T
    7. Geffen E
    8. Cheesman DJ
    9. Mututua RS
    10. Saiyalel SN
    11. Wayne RK
    12. Lacy RC
    13. Bruford MW

    (1996) Behavior predicts genes structure in a wild primate group

    PNAS 93:5797–5801.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.93.12.5797

    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Amici F
    2. Aureli F
    3. Call J

    (2008) Fission-fusion dynamics, behavioral flexibility, and inhibitory control in primates

    Current Biology 18:1415–1419.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.08.020

    • Google Scholar
12. Book

    1. Anandam MV
    2. Bennett EL
    3. Davenport TRB
    4. Davies NJ
    5. Detwiler KM
    6. Engelhardt A
    7. Eudey AA
    8. Gadsby EL
    9. Groves CP
    10. Healy A
    11. Karanth KP
    12. Molur S
    13. Nadler T
    14. Richardson MC
    15. Riley EP
    16. Roos C
    17. Rylands AB
    18. Sheeran LK
    19. Ting N
    20. Wallis J
    21. Waters SS
    22. Whittaker DJ
    23. Zinner D

    (2013)

    Species accounts of Cercopithecidae

    In: Mittermeier R, Rylands A, Wilson D, editors. Handbook of the Mammals of the World, 3. Barcelona, Primates: Lynx. pp. 628–753.

    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Archie EA
    2. Altmann J
    3. Alberts SC

    (2012) Social status predicts wound healing in wild baboons

    PNAS 109:9017–9022.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1206391109

    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Archie EA
    2. Tung J
    3. Clark M
    4. Altmann J
    5. Alberts SC

    (2014) Social affiliation matters: both same-sex and opposite-sex relationships predict survival in wild female baboons

    Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 281:20141261.

    https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1261

    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Aureli F
    2. Schaffner CM
    3. Boesch C
    4. Bearder SK
    5. Call J
    6. Chapman CA
    7. Connor R
    8. Fiore AD
    9. Dunbar RIM
    10. Henzi SP
    11. Holekamp K
    12. Korstjens AH
    13. Layton R
    14. Lee P
    15. Lehmann J
    16. Manson JH
    17. Ramos‐Fernandez G
    18. Strier KB
    19. Schaik CPvan

    (2008) Fission‐fusion dynamics

    Current Anthropology 49:627–654.

    https://doi.org/10.1086/586708

    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Bedford NL
    2. Hoekstra HE

    (2015) Peromyscus mice as a model for studying natural variation

    eLife 4:e06813.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06813

    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Beehner JC
    2. Bergman TJ
    3. Cheney DL
    4. Seyfarth RM
    5. Whitten PL

    (2005) The effect of new alpha males on female stress in free-ranging baboons

    Animal Behaviour 69:1211–1221.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.08.014

    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Beehner JC
    2. Onderdonk DA
    3. Alberts SC
    4. Altmann J

    (2006) The ecology of conception and pregnancy failure in wild baboons

    Behavioral Ecology 17:741–750.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arl006

    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Beehner JC
    2. Gesquiere L
    3. Seyfarth RM
    4. Cheney DL
    5. Alberts SC
    6. Altmann J

    (2009) Testosterone related to age and life-history stages in male baboons and geladas

    Hormones and Behavior 56:472–480.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2009.08.005

    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Bergey CM
    2. Phillips-Conroy JE
    3. Disotell TR
    4. Jolly CJ

    (2016) Dopamine pathway is highly diverged in primate species that differ markedly in social behavior

    PNAS 113:6178–6181.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525530113

    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Bergman TJ

    (2003) Hierarchical classification by rank and kinship in baboons

    Science 302:1234–1236.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1087513

    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Bergman TJ
    2. Beehner JC
    3. Cheney DL
    4. Seyfarth RM
    5. Whitten PL

    (2005) Correlates of stress in free-ranging male chacma baboons, Papio hamadryas ursinus

    Animal Behaviour 70:703–713.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.12.017

    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Buchan JC
    2. Alberts SC
    3. Silk JB
    4. Altmann J

    (2003) True paternal care in a multi-male primate society

    Nature 425:179–181.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01866

    • Google Scholar
24. Book

    1. Bulger JB

    (1993)

    Adult Male Savanna Baboon Mating Activity and Interactions with Infants

    Springer.

    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Chala D
    2. Roos C
    3. Svenning J-C
    4. Zinner D

    (2019) Species-specific effects of climate change on the distribution of suitable baboon habitats – Ecological niche modeling of current and Last Glacial Maximum conditions

    Journal of Human Evolution 132:215–226.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.05.003

    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Cheney DL
    2. Moscovice LR
    3. Heesen M
    4. Mundry R
    5. Seyfarth RM

    (2010) Contingent cooperation between wild female baboons

    PNAS 107:9562–9566.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1001862107

    • Google Scholar
27. Book

    1. Cheney DL
    2. Seyfarth RM

    (2008) Baboon Metaphysics: The Evolution of a Social Mind

    University of Chicago Press.

    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226102429.001.0001

    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Cracraft J

    (1983) Species concepts and speciation analysis

    Current Ornithology pp. 159–187.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6781-3_6

    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Crockford C
    2. Wittig RM
    3. Seyfarth RM
    4. Cheney DL

    (2007) Baboons eavesdrop to deduce mating opportunities

    Animal Behaviour 73:885–890.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.10.016

    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Dal Pesco F
    2. Fischer J

    (2018) Greetings in male guinea baboons and the function of rituals in complex social groups

    Journal of Human Evolution 125:87–98.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2018.10.007

    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Darwin C

    (1838) Notebook M: [Metaphysics on morals and speculations on expression (1838)] Darwin Online

    Notebook M: [Metaphysics on morals and speculations on expression (1838)] Darwin Online, http://darwin-online.org.uk.

    http://darwin-online.org.uk

    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Dolotovskaya S
    2. Torroba Bordallo J
    3. Haus T
    4. Noll A
    5. Hofreiter M
    6. Zinner D
    7. Roos C

    (2017) Comparing mitogenomic timetrees for two african savannah primate genera (Chlorocebus and Papio)

    Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 67:471–483.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlx001

    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Dunn J
    2. Cardini A
    3. Elton S

    (2013) Biogeographic variation in the baboon: dissecting the cline

    Journal of Anatomy 223:337–352.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/joa.12085

    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Engh AL
    2. Beehner JC
    3. Bergman TJ
    4. Whitten PL
    5. Hoffmeier RR
    6. Seyfarth RM
    7. Cheney DL

    (2006) Female hierarchy instability, male immigration and infanticide increase glucocorticoid levels in female chacma baboons

    Animal Behaviour 71:1227–1237.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.11.009

    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Faraut L
    2. Siviter H
    3. Pesco FD
    4. Fischer J

    (2019) How life in a tolerant society affects the usage of grunts: evidence from female and male Guinea baboons

    Animal Behaviour 153:83–93.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.05.003

    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Faraut L
    2. Fischer J

    (2019) How life in a tolerant society affects the attention to social information in baboons

    Animal Behaviour 152:11–17.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.04.004

    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Fehlmann G
    2. O’Riain MJ
    3. Kerr-Smith C
    4. Hailes S
    5. Luckman A
    6. Shepard ELC
    7. King AJ

    (2017) Extreme behavioural shifts by baboons exploiting risky, resource-rich, human-modified environments

    Scientific Reports 7:15057.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-14871-2

    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Ferreira da Silva MJ
    2. Kopp GH
    3. Casanova C
    4. Godinho R
    5. Minhós T
    6. Sá R
    7. Zinner D
    8. Bruford MW

    (2018) Disrupted dispersal and its genetic consequences: comparing protected and threatened baboon populations (Papio papio) in west Africa

    PLOS ONE 13:e0194189.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0194189

    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Fischer J
    2. Kopp GH
    3. Dal Pesco F
    4. Goffe A
    5. Hammerschmidt K
    6. Kalbitzer U
    7. Klapproth M
    8. Maciej P
    9. Ndao I
    10. Patzelt A
    11. Zinner D

    (2017) Charting the neglected west: the social system of Guinea baboons

    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 162:15–31.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23144

    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Fleagle JG

    (2013)

    Primate Adaptation and Evolution

    119–150, Old World monkeys, Primate Adaptation and Evolution, 3rd Edition, London, Academic Press, 10.1016/C2009-0-01979-5.

    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Frost SR
    2. Marcus LF
    3. Bookstein FL
    4. Reddy DP
    5. Delson E

    (2003) Cranial allometry, Phylogeography, and systematics of large-bodied papionins (primates: cercopithecinae) inferred from geometric morphometric analysis of landmark data

    The Anatomical Record 275A:1048–1072.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.a.10112

    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Fuchs AJ
    2. Gilbert CC
    3. Kamilar JM

    (2018) Ecological niche modeling of the genus Papio

    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 166:812–823.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23470

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Gesquiere LR
    2. Learn NH
    3. Simao MCM
    4. Onyango PO
    5. Alberts SC
    6. Altmann J

    (2011) Life at the top: rank and stress in wild male baboons

    Science 333:357–360.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1207120

    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Gesquiere LR
    2. Altmann J
    3. Archie EA
    4. Alberts SC

    (2018) Interbirth intervals in wild baboons: environmental predictors and hormonal correlates

    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 166:107–126.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23407

    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Goffe AS
    2. Zinner D
    3. Fischer J

    (2016) Sex and friendship in a multilevel society: behavioural patterns and associations between female and male Guinea baboons

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70:323–336.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-015-2050-6

    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Goffe AS
    2. Fischer J

    (2016) Meat sharing between male and female Guinea baboons (Papio papio)

    Primate Biology 3:1–8.

    https://doi.org/10.5194/pb-3-1-2016

    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Green RE
    2. Krause J
    3. Briggs AW
    4. Maricic T
    5. Stenzel U
    6. Kircher M
    7. Patterson N
    8. Li H
    9. Zhai W
    10. Fritz MHY
    11. Hansen NF
    12. Durand EY
    13. Malaspinas AS
    14. Jensen JD
    15. Marques-Bonet T
    16. Alkan C
    17. Prufer K
    18. Meyer M
    19. Burbano HA
    20. Good JM
    21. Schultz R
    22. Aximu-Petri A
    23. Butthof A
    24. Hober B
    25. Hoffner B
    26. Siegemund M
    27. Weihmann A
    28. Nusbaum C
    29. Lander ES
    30. Russ C
    31. Novod N
    32. Affourtit J
    33. Egholm M
    34. Verna C
    35. Rudan P
    36. Brajkovic D
    37. Kucan Z
    38. Gusic I
    39. Doronichev VB
    40. Golovanova LV
    41. Lalueza-Fox C
    42. de la Rasilla M
    43. Fortea J
    44. Rosas A
    45. Schmitz RW
    46. Johnson PLF
    47. Eichler EE
    48. Falush D
    49. Birney E
    50. Mullikin JC
    51. Slatkin M
    52. Nielsen R
    53. Kelso J
    54. Lachmann M
    55. Reich D
    56. Paabo S

    (2010) A draft sequence of the neandertal genome

    Science 328:710–722.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1188021

    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Hammerschmidt K
    2. Fischer J

    (2019) Baboon vocal repertoires and the evolution of primate vocal diversity

    Journal of Human Evolution 126:1–13.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2018.10.010

    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Henzi SP
    2. Barrett L

    (1999) The historical socioecology of savanna baboons (Papio hamadryas)

    Journal of Zoology 265:215–226.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952836904006399

    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Higham JP
    2. MacLarnon AM
    3. Ross C
    4. Heistermann M
    5. Semple S

    (2008) Baboon sexual swellings: information content of size and color

    Hormones and Behavior 53:452–462.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2007.11.019

    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Higham JP
    2. Warren Y
    3. Adanu J
    4. Umaru BN
    5. MacLarnon AM
    6. Sommer V
    7. Ross C

    (2009) Living on the edge: life-history of olive baboons at Gashaka-Gumti National Park, Nigeria

    American Journal of Primatology 71:293–304.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20651

    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Huchard E
    2. Alvergne A
    3. Féjan D
    4. Knapp LA
    5. Cowlishaw G
    6. Raymond M

    (2010) More than friends? Behavioural and genetic aspects of heterosexual associations in wild chacma baboons

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 64:769–781.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-009-0894-3

    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Huchard E
    2. Charpentier MJ
    3. Marshall H
    4. King AJ
    5. Knapp LA
    6. Cowlishaw G

    (2013) Paternal effects on access to resources in a promiscuous primate society

    Behavioral Ecology 24:229–236.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/ars158

    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Johnson SE

    (2003) Life history and the competitive environment: trajectories of growth, maturation, and reproductive output among chacma baboons

    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 120:83–98.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.10139

    • Google Scholar
55. Book

    1. Jolly CJ

    (1993) Species, subspecies, and baboon systematics

    In: Kimbel WH MLB, editors. Species, Species Concepts and Primate Evolution. Boston, MA: Springer. pp. 67–107.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-3745-2_4

    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Jolly CJ
    2. Phillips-Conroy JE
    3. Kaplan JR
    4. Mann JJ

    (2008) Cerebrospinal fluid monoaminergic metabolites in wild Papio anubis and P. hamadryas are concordant with Taxon-specific behavioral ontogeny

    International Journal of Primatology 29:1549–1566.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-008-9318-x

    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Jolly CJ

    (2019)

    Philopatry at the frontier: a demographically-driven scenario for the evolution of multi-level societies in baboons (Papio)

    Journal of Human Evolution In press.

    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Kalbitzer U
    2. Heistermann M
    3. Cheney D
    4. Seyfarth R
    5. Fischer J

    (2015) Social behavior and patterns of testosterone and glucocorticoid levels differ between male chacma and Guinea baboons

    Hormones and Behavior 75:100–110.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2015.08.013

    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Kalbitzer U
    2. Roos C
    3. Kopp GH
    4. Butynski TM
    5. Knauf S
    6. Zinner D
    7. Fischer J

    (2016) Insights into the genetic foundation of aggression in Papio and the evolution of two length-polymorphisms in the promoter regions of serotonin-related genes (5-HTTLPR and MAOALPR) in Papionini

    BMC Evolutionary Biology 16:121.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-016-0693-1

    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Kappeler PM

    (2019) A framework for studying social complexity

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 73:13.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-018-2601-8

    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Kitchen DM
    2. Cheney DL
    3. Engh AL
    4. Fischer J
    5. Moscovice LR
    6. Seyfarth RM

    (2013) Male baboon responses to experimental manipulations of loud “wahoo calls”: testing an honest signal of fighting ability

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 67:1825–1835.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-013-1592-8

    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Kopp GH
    2. Ferreira da Silva MJ
    3. Fischer J
    4. Brito JC
    5. Regnaut S
    6. Roos C
    7. Zinner D

    (2014) The influence of social systems on patterns of mitochondrial DNA variation in baboons

    International Journal of Primatology 35:210–225.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-013-9725-5

    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Kopp GH
    2. Fischer J
    3. Patzelt A
    4. Roos C
    5. Zinner D

    (2015) Population genetic insights into the social organization of Guinea baboons (Papio papio): Evidence for female-biased dispersal

    American Journal of Primatology 77:878–889.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.22415

    • Google Scholar
64. Book

    1. Kummer H

    (1968)

    Social Organization of Hamadryas Baboons

    University of Chicago Press.

    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Lea AJ
    2. Altmann J
    3. Alberts SC
    4. Tung J

    (2015) Developmental constraints in a wild primate

    The American Naturalist 185:809–821.

    https://doi.org/10.1086/681016

    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Lemasson A
    2. Palombit RA
    3. Jubin R

    (2008) Friendships between males and lactating females in a free-ranging group of olive baboons (Papio hamadryas anubis): evidence from playback experiments

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 62:1027–1035.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-007-0530-z

    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Maciej P
    2. Patzelt A
    3. Ndao I
    4. Hammerschmidt K
    5. Fischer J

    (2013) Social monitoring in a multilevel society: a playback study with male Guinea baboons

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 67:61–68.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-012-1425-1

    • Google Scholar
68. Book

    1. Marais EN

    (1939)

    My Friends the Baboons

    London: Methuen.

    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Markham AC
    2. Gesquiere LR
    3. Alberts SC
    4. Altmann J

    (2015) Optimal group size in a highly social mammal

    PNAS 112:14882–14887.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517794112

    • Google Scholar
70. Book

    1. Mayr E

    (1963)

    Animal Species and Evolution

    Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Minhós T
    2. Wallace E
    3. Ferreira da Silva MJ
    4. Sá RM
    5. Carmo M
    6. Barata A
    7. Bruford MW

    (2013) DNA identification of primate bushmeat from urban markets in Guinea-Bissau and its implications for conservation

    Biological Conservation 167:43–49.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.07.018

    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Moscovice LR
    2. Di Fiore A
    3. Crockford C
    4. Kitchen DM
    5. Wittig R
    6. Seyfarth RM
    7. Cheney DL

    (2010) Hedging their bets? male and female chacma baboons form friendships based on likelihood of paternity

    Animal Behaviour 79:1007–1015.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.01.013

    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Newman TK
    2. Jolly CJ
    3. Rogers J

    (2004) Mitochondrial phylogeny and systematics of baboons (Papio)

    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 124:17–27.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.10340

    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Nguyen N
    2. Van Horn RC
    3. Alberts SC
    4. Altmann J

    (2009) “Friendships” between new mothers and adult males: adaptive benefits and determinants in wild baboons (Papio cynocephalus)

    Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 63:1331–1344.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-009-0786-6

    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Noë R
    2. Sluijter AA

    (1990) Reproductive tactics of male savanna baboons

    Behaviour 113:117–169.

    https://doi.org/10.1163/156853990X00455

    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Noë R
    2. Sluijter AA

    (1995) Which adult male savanna baboons form coalitions?

    International Journal of Primatology 16:77–105.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02700154

    • Google Scholar
77. 1. O'Connell SM
    2. Cowlishaw G

    (1994) Infanticide avoidance, sperm competition and mate choice: the function of copulation calls in female baboons

    Animal Behaviour 48:687–694.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1994.1288

    • Google Scholar
78. Report

    1. Oates JF
    2. Gippoliti S
    3. Groves CP

    (2008) Papio Papio, Guinea Baboon

    IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

    https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T16018A5354225.en

    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Paciência F
    2. Rushmore J
    3. Chuma IS
    4. Lipende IF
    5. Caillaud D
    6. Knauf S
    7. Zinner D

    (2019)

    Mating avoidance in female olive baboons (Papio anubis) infected by Treponema pallidum

    Science Advances In press.

    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Packer C
    2. Collins DA
    3. Sindimwo A
    4. Goodall J

    (1995) Reproductive constraints on aggressive competition in female baboons

    Nature 373:60–63.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/373060a0

    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Palombit RA
    2. Seyfarth RM
    3. Cheney DL

    (1997) The adaptive value of ‘friendships’ to female baboons: experimental and observational evidence

    Animal Behaviour 54:599–614.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1996.0457

    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Palombit RA
    2. Cheney DL
    3. Seyfarth RM

    (2001) Female–female competition for male ‘friends’ in wild chacma baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus)

    Animal Behaviour 61:1159–1171.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1690

    • Google Scholar
83. 1. Patzelt A
    2. Zinner D
    3. Fickenscher G
    4. Diedhiou S
    5. Camara B
    6. Stahl D
    7. Fischer J

    (2011) Group composition of guinea baboons (Papio papio) at a water place suggests a fluid social organization

    International Journal of Primatology 32:652–668.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-011-9493-z

    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Patzelt A
    2. Kopp GH
    3. Ndao I
    4. Kalbitzer U
    5. Zinner D
    6. Fischer J

    (2014) Male tolerance and male-male bonds in a multilevel primate society

    PNAS 111:14740–14745.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1405811111

    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Perry GH
    2. Marioni JC
    3. Melsted P
    4. Gilad Y

    (2010) Genomic-scale capture and sequencing of endogenous DNA from feces

    Molecular Ecology 19:5332–5344.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2010.04888.x

    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Petersdorf M
    2. Weyher AH
    3. Kamilar JM
    4. Dubuc C
    5. Higham JP

    (2019) Sexual selection in the Kinda baboon

    Journal of Human Evolution 135:102635.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.06.006

    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Phifer-Rixey M
    2. Nachman MW

    (2015) Insights into mammalian biology from the wild house mouse Mus musculus

    eLife 4:e05959.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05959

    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Prüfer K
    2. Racimo F
    3. Patterson N
    4. Jay F
    5. Sankararaman S
    6. Sawyer S
    7. Heinze A
    8. Renaud G
    9. Sudmant PH
    10. de Filippo C
    11. Li H
    12. Mallick S
    13. Dannemann M
    14. Fu Q
    15. Kircher M
    16. Kuhlwilm M
    17. Lachmann M
    18. Meyer M
    19. Ongyerth M
    20. Siebauer M
    21. Theunert C
    22. Tandon A
    23. Moorjani P
    24. Pickrell J
    25. Mullikin JC
    26. Vohr SH
    27. Green RE
    28. Hellmann I
    29. Johnson PLF
    30. Blanche H
    31. Cann H
    32. Kitzman JO
    33. Shendure J
    34. Eichler EE
    35. Lein ES
    36. Bakken TE
    37. Golovanova LV
    38. Doronichev VB
    39. Shunkov MV
    40. Derevianko AP
    41. Viola B
    42. Slatkin M
    43. Reich D
    44. Kelso J
    45. Pääbo S

    (2014) The complete genome sequence of a Neanderthal from the Altai Mountains

    Nature 505:43–49.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12886

    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Prüfer K
    2. de Filippo C
    3. Grote S
    4. Mafessoni F
    5. Korlević P
    6. Hajdinjak M
    7. Vernot B
    8. Skov L
    9. Hsieh P
    10. Peyrégne S
    11. Reher D
    12. Hopfe C
    13. Nagel S
    14. Maricic T
    15. Fu Q
    16. Theunert C
    17. Rogers R
    18. Skoglund P
    19. Chintalapati M
    20. Dannemann M
    21. Nelson BJ
    22. Key FM
    23. Rudan P
    24. Kućan Željko
    25. Gušić I
    26. Golovanova LV
    27. Doronichev VB
    28. Patterson N
    29. Reich D
    30. Eichler EE
    31. Slatkin M
    32. Schierup MH
    33. Andrés AM
    34. Kelso J
    35. Meyer M
    36. Pääbo S

    (2017) A high-coverage Neandertal genome from Vindija Cave in Croatia

    Science 358:655–658.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao1887

    • Google Scholar
90. 1. Reich D
    2. Green RE
    3. Kircher M
    4. Krause J
    5. Patterson N
    6. Durand EY
    7. Viola B
    8. Briggs AW
    9. Stenzel U
    10. Johnson PLF
    11. Maricic T
    12. Good JM
    13. Marques-Bonet T
    14. Alkan C
    15. Fu Q
    16. Mallick S
    17. Li H
    18. Meyer M
    19. Eichler EE
    20. Stoneking M
    21. Richards M
    22. Talamo S
    23. Shunkov MV
    24. Derevianko AP
    25. Hublin J-J
    26. Kelso J
    27. Slatkin M
    28. Pääbo S

    (2010) Genetic history of an archaic hominin group from Denisova cave in Siberia

    Nature 468:1053–1060.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09710

    • Google Scholar
91. 1. Robinson JA
    2. Belsare S
    3. Birnbaum S
    4. Newman DE
    5. Chan J
    6. Glenn JP
    7. Ferguson B
    8. Cox LA
    9. Wall JD

    (2019) Analysis of 100 high-coverage genomes from a pedigreed captive baboon colony

    Genome Research 29:848–856.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.247122.118

    • Google Scholar
92. 1. Rogers J

    (2018) The behavioral genetics of nonhuman primates: status and prospects

    American Journal of Physical Anthropology 165:23–36.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.23384

    • Google Scholar
93. 1. Rogers J
    2. Raveendran M
    3. Harris RA
    4. Mailund T
    5. Leppälä K
    6. Athanasiadis G
    7. Schierup MH
    8. Cheng J
    9. Munch K
    10. Walker JA
    11. Konkel MK
    12. Jordan V
    13. Steely CJ
    14. Beckstrom TO
    15. Bergey C
    16. Burrell A
    17. Schrempf D
    18. Noll A
    19. Kothe M
    20. Kopp GH
    21. Liu Y
    22. Murali S
    23. Billis K
    24. Martin FJ
    25. Muffato M
    26. Cox L
    27. Else J
    28. Disotell T
    29. Muzny DM
    30. Phillips-Conroy J
    31. Aken B
    32. Eichler EE
    33. Marques-Bonet T
    34. Kosiol C
    35. Batzer MA
    36. Hahn MW
    37. Tung J
    38. Zinner D
    39. Roos C
    40. Jolly CJ
    41. Gibbs RA
    42. Worley KC
    43. Baboon Genome Analysis Consortium

    (2019) The comparative genomics and complex population history of Papio baboons

    Science Advances 5:eaau6947.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau6947

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. Scerri EML
    2. Thomas MG
    3. Manica A
    4. Gunz P
    5. Stock JT
    6. Stringer C
    7. Grove M
    8. Groucutt HS
    9. Timmermann A
    10. Rightmire GP
    11. d’Errico F
    12. Tryon CA
    13. Drake NA
    14. Brooks AS
    15. Dennell RW
    16. Durbin R
    17. Henn BM
    18. Lee-Thorp J
    19. deMenocal P
    20. Petraglia MD
    21. Thompson JC
    22. Scally A
    23. Chikhi L

    (2018) Did our species evolve in subdivided populations across Africa, and why does it matter?

    Trends in Ecology & Evolution 33:582–594.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2018.05.005

    • Google Scholar
95. 1. Schreier AL
    2. Swedell L

    (2009) The fourth level of social structure in a multi-level society: ecological and social functions of clans in hamadryas baboons

    American Journal of Primatology 71:948–955.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.20736

    • Google Scholar
96. 1. Silk JB

    (2003) Social bonds of female baboons enhance infant survival

    Science 302:1231–1234.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1088580

    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Silk JB
    2. Beehner JC
    3. Bergman TJ
    4. Crockford C
    5. Engh AL
    6. Moscovice LR
    7. Wittig RM
    8. Seyfarth RM
    9. Cheney DL

    (2010) Strong and consistent social bonds enhance the longevity of female baboons

    Current Biology 20:1359–1361.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2010.05.067

    • Google Scholar
98. 1. Silk JB
    2. Roberts ER
    3. Barrett BJ
    4. Patterson SK
    5. Strum SC

    (2017) Female–male relationships influence the form of female–female relationships in olive baboons, Papio anubis

    Animal Behaviour 131:89–98.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2017.07.015

    • Google Scholar
99. Book

    1. Smuts BB

    (1985)

    Sex and Friendship in Baboons

    New York: Aldine Publishing Company.

    • Google Scholar
100. 1. Smuts B
     2. Nicolson N

     (1989) Reproduction in wild female olive baboons

     American Journal of Primatology 19:229–246.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.1350190405

     • Google Scholar
101. 1. Snyder-Mackler N
     2. Majoros WH
     3. Yuan ML
     4. Shaver AO
     5. Gordon JB
     6. Kopp GH
     7. Schlebusch SA
     8. Wall JD
     9. Alberts SC
     10. Mukherjee S
     11. Zhou X
     12. Tung J

     (2016) Efficient Genome-Wide sequencing and Low-Coverage pedigree analysis from noninvasively collected samples

     Genetics 203:699–714.

     https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.116.187492

     • Google Scholar
102. 1. Städele V
     2. Van Doren V
     3. Pines M
     4. Swedell L
     5. Vigilant L

     (2015) Fine-scale genetic assessment of sex-specific dispersal patterns in a multilevel primate society

     Journal of Human Evolution 78:103–113.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.10.019

     • Google Scholar
103. 1. Städele V
     2. Pines M
     3. Swedell L
     4. Vigilant L

     (2016) The ties that bind: maternal kin bias in a multilevel primate society despite natal dispersal by both sexes

     American Journal of Primatology 78:731–744.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.22537

     • Google Scholar
104. 1. Städele V
     2. Roberts ER
     3. Barrett BJ
     4. Strum SC
     5. Vigilant L
     6. Silk JB

     (2019) Male–female relationships in olive baboons (Papio anubis): Parenting or mating effort?

     Journal of Human Evolution 127:81–92.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2018.09.003

     • Google Scholar
105. 1. Strandburg-Peshkin A
     2. Farine DR
     3. Couzin ID
     4. Crofoot MC

     (2015) Shared decision-making drives collective movement in wild baboons

     Science 348:1358–1361.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa5099

     • Google Scholar
106. 1. Stringer C

     (2016) The origin and evolution of Homo sapiens

     Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 371:20150237.

     https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0237

     • Google Scholar
107. Book

     1. Swedell L

     (2011)

     African Papionins: Diversity of Social Organization and Ecological Flexibility

     In: Campbell C, Fuentes A, MacKinnon K, Bearder S, Stumpf R, editors. Primates in Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 241–277.

     • Google Scholar
108. Book

     1. Swedell L

     (2013) Hamadryas Baboon (Papio hamadryas)

     In: Butynski T, Kingdon J, editors. The Mammals of Africa. Primates. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. pp. 221–224.

     https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472926920.0038

     • Google Scholar
109. 1. Tung J
     2. Alberts SC
     3. Wray GA

     (2010) Evolutionary genetics in wild primates: combining genetic approaches with field studies of natural populations

     Trends in Genetics 26:353–362.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2010.05.005

     • Google Scholar
110. Book

     1. VandeBerg JL

     (2009) Introduction

     In: Vandeberg J. L, Williams-Blangero S, Tardif S. D, editors. The Baboon in Biomedical Research. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. i–xxiii.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75991-3

     • Google Scholar
111. 1. Vilgalys TP
     2. Rogers J
     3. Jolly CJ
     4. Mukherjee S
     5. Tung J

     (2019) Evolution of DNA methylation in Papio baboons

     Molecular Biology and Evolution 36:527–540.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy227

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
112. 1. Vore DI
     2. Washburn SL

     (1961) The social life of baboons

     Scientific American 204:62–72.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0661-62

     • Google Scholar
113. 1. Walker JA
     2. Jordan VE
     3. Steely CJ
     4. Beckstrom TO
     5. McDaniel CL
     6. St. Romain CP
     7. Bennett EC
     8. Robichaux A
     9. Clement BN
     10. Konkel MK
     11. Batzer MA

     (2017) Papio baboon species indicative alu elements

     Genome Biology and Evolution 9:1788–1796.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evx130

     • Google Scholar
114. 1. Wall JD
     2. Schlebusch SA
     3. Alberts SC
     4. Cox LA
     5. Snyder-Mackler N
     6. Nevonen KA
     7. Carbone L
     8. Tung J

     (2016) Genomewide ancestry and divergence patterns from low-coverage sequencing data reveal a complex history of admixture in wild baboons

     Molecular Ecology 25:3469–3483.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13684

     • Google Scholar
115. 1. Wasser SK
     2. Norton GW
     3. Kleindorfer S
     4. Rhine RJ

     (2004) Population trend alters the effects of maternal dominance rank on lifetime reproductive success in yellow baboons (Papio cynocephalus)

     Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 56:338–345.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-004-0797-2

     • Google Scholar
116. 1. Zinner D
     2. Groeneveld LF
     3. Keller C
     4. Roos C

     (2009) Mitochondrial phylogeography of baboons (Papio spp.) – Indication for introgressive hybridization?

     BMC Evolutionary Biology 9:83.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-83

     • Google Scholar
117. 1. Zinner D
     2. Arnold ML
     3. Roos C

     (2011) The strange blood: natural hybridization in primates

     Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 20:96–103.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20301

     • Google Scholar
118. 1. Zinner D
     2. Wertheimer J
     3. Liedigk R
     4. Groeneveld LF
     5. Roos C

     (2013) Baboon phylogeny as inferred from complete mitochondrial genomes

     American Journal of Physical Anthropology 150:133–140.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.22185

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar

Thank you for submitting your article "The Natural History of Model Organisms: Insights into the evolution of social systems and species from baboon studies" for consideration by eLife. Your article has been reviewed by two peer reviewers, and the evaluation has been overseen by two Features Editors at eLife (Stuart King and Peter Rodgers). The following individual involved in review of your submission has agreed to reveal their identity: Jason Kamilar.

The reviewers have discussed the reviews with one another and the Associate Features Editor has drafted this decision to help you prepare a revised submission.

Summary:

This essay is being considered as part of a series of articles on "The Natural History of Model Organisms": https://elifesciences.org/collections/8de90445/the-natural-history-of-model-organisms. Each article should explain how our knowledge of the natural history of a model organism has informed recent advances in biology, and how understanding its natural history can influence/advance future studies.

Overall, it was a pleasure to read this clear summary of current knowledge about the natural history of baboons. The manuscript is a wide-ranging, authoritative, and interesting read. The authors have done an excellent job of concisely presenting an overview of baboon biology and its relevance for being considered a model organism in ecology and evolution. The reviewers expect this paper to be highly cited and look forward to seeing it published after a few revisions are made. The hope is that the revisions will provide some more context for readers who are less familiar with baboon research, and help condense the article slightly to make it more focused, which could help to increase its ultimate impact.

Essential revisions:

1) This manuscript could be considered to be an interesting outlier for the "Natural History of Model Organisms" series, which has thus far focused on species that have largely been studied in the lab or under domestication (or are close relatives of a lab model organism). In contrast, this paper focuses exclusively on research in the wild, on a set of species that are unusually well studied in their natural context. For the benefit of non-baboon researchers, it would be helpful if the Introduction acknowledged that baboons may seem to be an unusual choice for a model organism, but then explain what it is that makes them such a good model for certain questions (i.e. better than other species that are routinely studied in the lab). A mention of the rather extensive work on baboons in captivity, where they are among the most intensively studied non-human primates in biomedical science, would also be appreciated here. Work in the wild extends the scope of what the community can learn from baboons beyond captive research, and it would be interesting if the authors shared their thoughts as to whether it also helps to motivate the research done with captive baboons, or to interpret those results?

2) The sections on systematics and phylogeography could be combined with some text currently in the Introduction to give a more general introduction to the "Natural history of baboons". Restructuring this text may also present opportunities to cut some text, because, for example, geographic ranges are currently discussed in three separate places. Breaking the new section into short, clearly defined sub-sections (i.e. Systematics, Morphology, Habitats, Diet etc.) may also help the reader to navigate this background information.

3) The reviewers felt that the discussion of allele surfing (subsection "Population genetics and range expansion", third paragraph) could probably be removed. While this could be interesting and relevant to baboon evolution, none of the citations in this paragraph are actually about baboons. As such, it was unclear how baboons have contributed thus far to this question or even whether they would be better models than, say, humans or classical lab model organisms. Removing the text would help to keep the article focused.

4) Given that they touch upon related topics, the section on "Baboons in the Anthropocene" could be moved to follow the section on "Population and range expansion". This change could help this later section to feel more integrated in the article, and would mean that the article's structure more closely follows the order of the research areas that are very nicely articulated in the Conclusion.

5) The sections on "Variation in social organization and behavior" and "Previously understudied species reveal hidden diversity" should also be integrated into one and condensed, since the hidden diversity discussed is also about social organization and behavior. The Social Cognition section could also likely be condensed by a few sentences.

6) The section on "Functional genomics" seems to be more tool or method-driven that the previous sections and is almost all future-oriented. It would be good if it could give more concrete examples of how, when applied to baboons, these methods could advance broad biological knowledge. If the section on "Baboons in the Anthropocene" is moved earlier in the text, this section would be the penultimate in the article. As such, one approach would be to use this section to explain how/why functional genomic approaches could be leveraged to advance the questions laid out in the previous sections, especially if the authors can include examples from the recent literature. Alternatively, the authors should explicitly note that, compared to the other areas highlighted, there's much more to be done in this area of research.

7) Throughout the article there are a few places where the paper may assume too much about domain/disciplinary knowledge on the part of readers. The Glossary can help with this, if the definitions provided are written to be as accessible as possibly. Most importantly, the reviewers suggest explaining what "rank" is (it first appears in the subsection "Variation in social organization and behavior"), whether it's sex-specific, and why it's important in baboons. Other cases include the use of the term "despotic" (likely to be familiar to primatologists, but not to many others), mention of copulation calls (why is it meaningful that they might differ in chacma baboons?), and citing "the African multi-regionalism" hypothesis (a reader may know why it's important that baboons are a model for this hypothesis if they don't know what it is).

Essential revisions:

1) This manuscript could be considered to be an interesting outlier for the "Natural History of Model Organisms" series, which has thus far focused on species that have largely been studied in the lab or under domestication (or are close relatives of a lab model organism). In contrast, this paper focuses exclusively on research in the wild, on a set of species that are unusually well studied in their natural context. For the benefit of non-baboon researchers, it would be helpful if the Introduction acknowledged that baboons may seem to be an unusual choice for a model organism, but then explain what it is that makes them such a good model for certain questions (i.e. better than other species that are routinely studied in the lab). A mention of the rather extensive work on baboons in captivity, where they are among the most intensively studied non-human primates in biomedical science, would also be appreciated here. Work in the wild extends the scope of what the community can learn from baboons beyond captive research, and it would be interesting if the authors shared their thoughts as to whether it also helps to motivate the research done with captive baboons, or to interpret those results?

We have followed this suggestion, and tried to be more explicit why this paper might be relevant for scientists who use baboons in biomedical research. In the Introduction, we now write: "In the 1950s, baboons became the subject of more systematic scientific enquiry, both in the field, and in captivity. […] An understanding of the evolution and natural life-history also allows assessment of the validity of results derived from captive populations." We also return to this theme briefly in the Conclusion.

2) The sections on systematics and phylogeography could be combined with some text currently in the Introduction to give a more general introduction to the "Natural history of baboons". Restructuring this text may also present opportunities to cut some text, because, for example, geographic ranges are currently discussed in three separate places. Breaking the new section into short, clearly defined sub-sections (i.e. Systematics, Morphology, Habitats, Diet etc.) may also help the reader to navigate this background information.

We thought a lot about this suggestion, and have partly implemented it. Our reasoning was that we first introduce the taxon and then talk about the different species. We feel that we need to introduce this variation first before we go on to present species differences in Morphology etc. There are only two sentences on Diet, so we did not establish a new subsection. We did, however, cut text in a number of places to avoid the highlighted redundancy.

3) The reviewers felt that the discussion of allele surfing (subsection "Population genetics and range expansion", third paragraph) could probably be removed. While this could be interesting and relevant to baboon evolution, none of the citations in this paragraph are actually about baboons. As such, it was unclear how baboons have contributed thus far to this question or even whether they would be better models than, say, humans or classical lab model organisms. Removing the text would help to keep the article focused.

We agree, and have removed this section.

4) Given that they touch upon related topics, the section on "Baboons in the Anthropocene" could be moved to follow the section on "Population and range expansion". This change could help this later section to feel more integrated in the article, and would mean that the article's structure more closely follows the order of the research areas that are very nicely articulated in the Conclusion.

We understand this suggestion, but we believe that the "Baboons in the Anthropocene" section belongs as the final section, as it is prospective, and about the future of baboons. We have, however, edited the Conclusion such that the order there accurately reflects the order of the content.

5) The sections on "Variation in social organization and behavior" and "Previously understudied species reveal hidden diversity" should also be integrated into one and condensed, since the hidden diversity discussed is also about social organization and behavior. The Social Cognition section could also likely be condensed by a few sentences.

We have followed this suggestion and have both integrated and shortened these two sections.

6) The section on "Functional genomics" seems to be more tool or method-driven that the previous sections and is almost all future-oriented. It would be good if it could give more concrete examples of how, when applied to baboons, these methods could advance broad biological knowledge. If the section on "Baboons in the Anthropocene" is moved earlier in the text, this section would be the penultimate in the article. As such, one approach would be to use this section to explain how/why functional genomic approaches could be leveraged to advance the questions laid out in the previous sections, especially if the authors can include examples from the recent literature. Alternatively, the authors should explicitly note that, compared to the other areas highlighted, there's much more to be done in this area of research.

Thank you for this suggestion. We now explicitly state that this is a research area on the cusp of blooming; we now state: "Researchers now have access to whole genome sequence data and other genomic information such as annotations for protein coding genes and transcriptome information (Robinson et al., 2019; Rogers et al., 2019; Vilgalys et al., 2019). We therefore expect an exponential increase in the number and diversity of available genomes, which will facilitate the genomic investigation of the molecular and cellular basis of baboon adaptations and adaptive flexibility."

7) Throughout the article there are a few places where the paper may assume too much about domain/disciplinary knowledge on the part of readers. The Glossary can help with this, if the definitions provided are written to be as accessible as possibly. Most importantly, the reviewers suggest explaining what "rank" is (it first appears in the subsection "Variation in social organization and behavior"), whether it's sex-specific, and why it's important in baboons. Other cases include the use of the term "despotic" (likely to be familiar to primatologists, but not to many others), mention of copulation calls (why is it meaningful that they might differ in chacma baboons?), and citing "the African multi-regionalism" hypothesis (a reader may know why it's important that baboons are a model for this hypothesis if they don't know what it is).

We are sorry that we sometimes used too much jargon. We now explain the concept of rank and why it is important. We also explain despotism, and have used more general terms whenever we felt we could (e.g., perineal --> anogenital; shorter periods of post-partum amenorrhea --> shorter periods before they resume menstrual cycling following birth). We cut the African multi-regionalism hypothesis and simply refer to different hypotheses regarding human origins. We appreciate any further suggestions where we might remove further jargon that we may have overlooked.

Author details

1. Julia Fischer

   Julia Fischer is in the Cognitive Ethology Laboratory at the German Primate Center, Leibniz-Institute for Primate Research, the Department of Primate Cognition, Georg-August-University of Göttingen, and at the Leibniz Science Campus for Primate Cognition, Göttingen, Germany

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

   Contributed equally with

   James P Higham

   For correspondence

   jfischer@dpz.eu

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5807-0074

2. James P Higham

   James P Higham is in the Department of Anthropology, New York University and the New York Consortium in Evolutionary Primatology, New York, United States

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

   Contributed equally with

   Julia Fischer

   For correspondence

   jhigham@nyu.edu

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1133-2030

3. Susan C Alberts

   Susan C Alberts in the Departments of Biology and Evolutionary Anthropology, Duke University, Durham, United States and at the Institute of Primate Research, Nairobi, Kenya

   Contribution

   Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1313-488X

4. Louise Barrett

   Louise Barrett is in the Department of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Canada and the Applied Behavioural Ecology and Ecosystems Research Unit, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa

   Contribution

   Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

5. Jacinta C Beehner

   Jacinta C Beehner is in the Departments of Psychology and Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States

   Contribution

   Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

6. Thore J Bergman

   Thore J Bergman is in the Departments of Psychology and Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States

   Contribution

   Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

7. Alecia J Carter

   Alecia J Carter is at the Institut des Sciences de l’Evolution de Montpellier, Montpellier, France and Université de Montpellier, CNRS, IRD, EPHE, Montpellier, France

   Contribution

   Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5550-9312

8. Anthony Collins

   Anthony Collins is at the Gombe Stream Research Centre, Jane Goodall Institute, Kigoma, Tanzania

   Contribution

   Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

9. Sarah Elton

   Sarah Elton is in the Department of Anthropology, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Writing—review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

10. Joël Fagot

    Joël Fagot is at Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France, and Centre Nationalde la Recherche Scientifique, Montpellier, France

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

11. Maria Joana Ferreira da Silva

    Maria J Ferreira da Silva is in the Organisms and Environment Division, School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom; the Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto, Portugal; and the Centro de Administração e Políticas Públicas, School of Social and Political Sciences, University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

12. Kurt Hammerschmidt

    Kurt Hammerschmidt in the Cognitive Ethology Laboratory at the German Primate Center, Leibniz-Institute for Primate Research, Göttingen, Germany

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

13. Peter Henzi

    Peter Henzi is in the Department of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Canada and the Applied Behavioural Ecology and Ecosystems Research Unit, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

14. Clifford J Jolly

    Clifford Jolly is in the Department of Anthropology, New York University and the New York Consortium in Evolutionary Primatology, New York, United States

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

15. Sascha Knauf

    Sascha Knauf is in the Work Group Neglected Tropical Diseases, Infection Biology Unit, German Primate Center, Leibniz-Institute for Primate Research, and the Division of Microbiology and Animal Hygiene, Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5744-4946

16. Gisela H Kopp

    Gisela H Kopp is in the Zukunftskolleg, the Department of Biology and the Centre for the Advanced Study of Collective Behaviour at University of Konstanz, and the Department of Migration, Max Planck Institute for Animal Behaviour in Konstanz, Germany

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

17. Jeffrey Rogers

    Jeffrey Rogers is at the Human Genome Sequencing Center and the Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

18. Christian Roos

    Christian Roos is in the Gene Bank of Primates and the Primate Genetics Laboratory at the German Primate Center, Leibniz-Institute for Primate Research, Göttingen, Germany

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

19. Caroline Ross

    Caroline Ross is in the Department of Life Sciences, Roehampton University, London, United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

20. Robert M Seyfarth

    Robert M Seyfarth is in the Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

21. Joan Silk

    Joan Silk is in the School of Human Evolution and Social Change, and the Institute for Human Origins, Arizona State University, Tempe, United States

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

22. Noah Snyder-Mackler

    Noah Snyder-Mackler is in the Department of Psychology, the Center for Studies in Demography and Ecology and the National Primate Research Center at the University of Washington, Seattle, United States

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

23. Veronika Staedele

    Veronika Städele is at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

24. Larissa Swedell

    Larissa Swedell is in the Department of Anthropology, Queens College, City University of New York and the New York Consortium in Evolutionary Primatology, New York, United States and the Department of Archaeology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

25. Michael L Wilson

    Michael L Wilson is in the Departments of Anthropology and Ecology, Evolution and Behavior at University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, and the Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, United States

    Contribution

    Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

26. Dietmar Zinner

    Dietmar Zinner is in the Cognitive Ethology Laboratory at the German Primate Center, Leibniz-Institute for Primate Research and at the Leibniz ScienceCampus for Primate Cognition, Göttingen, Germany

    Contribution

    Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

    "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3967-8014

• 10,658

  views

• 648

  downloads

• 61

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.