Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts

Michael L Wilson; Christophe Boesch; Barbara Fruth; Takeshi Furuichi; Ian C. Gilby; Chie Hashimoto; Catherine L. Hobaiter; Gottfried Hohmann; Noriko Itoh; Kathelijne Koops; Julia N. Lloyd; Tetsuro Matsuzawa; John C. Mitani; Deus C. Mjungu; David Morgan; Martin N. Muller; Roger Mundry; Michio Nakamura; Jill Pruetz; Anne E. Pusey; Julia Riedel; Crickette Sanz; Anne M. Schel; Nicole Simmons; Michel Waller; David P. Watts; Frances White; Roman M. Wittig; Klaus Zuberbühler; Richard W. Wrangham

doi:10.1038/nature13727

Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts

Michael L Wilson, Christophe Boesch, Barbara Fruth, Takeshi Furuichi, Ian C. Gilby, Chie Hashimoto, Catherine L. Hobaiter, Gottfried Hohmann, Noriko Itoh, Kathelijne Koops, Julia N. Lloyd, Tetsuro Matsuzawa, John C. Mitani, Deus C. Mjungu, David Morgan, Martin N. Muller, Roger Mundry, Michio Nakamura, Jill Pruetz, Anne E. PuseyJulia Riedel, Crickette Sanz, Anne M. Schel, Nicole Simmons, Michel Waller, David P. Watts, Frances White, Roman M. Wittig, Klaus Zuberbühler, Richard W. Wrangham

Anthropology (Twin Cities)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

269 Scopus citations

Abstract

Observations of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) provide valuable comparative data for understanding the significance of conspecific killing. Two kinds of hypothesis have been proposed. Lethal violence is sometimes concluded to be the result of adaptive strategies, such that killers ultimately gain fitness benefits by increasing their access to resources such as food or mates. Alternatively, it could be a non-adaptive result of human impacts, such as habitat change or food provisioning. To discriminate between these hypotheses we compiled information from 18 chimpanzee communities and 4 bonobo communities studied over five decades. Our data include 152 killings (n = 58 observed, 41 inferred, and 53 suspected killings) by chimpanzees in 15 communities and one suspected killing by bonobos. We found that males were the most frequent attackers (92% of participants) and victims (73%); most killings (66%) involved intercommunity attacks; and attackers greatly outnumbered their victims (median 8:1 ratio). Variation in killing rates was unrelated to measures of human impacts. Our results are compatible with previously proposed adaptive explanations for killing by chimpanzees, whereas the human impact hypothesis is not supported.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	414-417
Number of pages	4
Journal	Nature
Volume	513
Issue number	7518
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13727
State	Published - Sep 18 2014

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Acknowledgements This study was funded by National Science Foundation grants BCS-0648481 and LTREB-1052693 and National Institutes of Health grant R01 AI 058715. Numerous additional sources of funding have supported the long-term studies that contributed data to this study. We thank J. H. Jones for statistical advice; L. Pintea for preparing the map for Extended Data Fig. 1b; I. Lipende and R. Lawrence for providing details on recent cases at Gombe and Kanyantale; S. Amsler for helping to calculate the range of the Kanyantale community, and the many field assistants who collected data.

Publisher Copyright:
©2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Publisher link

10.1038/nature13727

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

Wilson, M. L., Boesch, C., Fruth, B., Furuichi, T., Gilby, I. C., Hashimoto, C., Hobaiter, C. L., Hohmann, G., Itoh, N., Koops, K., Lloyd, J. N., Matsuzawa, T., Mitani, J. C., Mjungu, D. C., Morgan, D., Muller, M. N., Mundry, R., Nakamura, M., Pruetz, J., ... Wrangham, R. W. (2014). Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts. Nature, 513(7518), 414-417. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13727

Wilson, ML, Boesch, C, Fruth, B, Furuichi, T, Gilby, IC, Hashimoto, C, Hobaiter, CL, Hohmann, G, Itoh, N, Koops, K, Lloyd, JN, Matsuzawa, T, Mitani, JC, Mjungu, DC, Morgan, D, Muller, MN, Mundry, R, Nakamura, M, Pruetz, J, Pusey, AE, Riedel, J, Sanz, C, Schel, AM, Simmons, N, Waller, M, Watts, DP, White, F, Wittig, RM, Zuberbühler, K & Wrangham, RW 2014, 'Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts', Nature, vol. 513, no. 7518, pp. 414-417. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13727

@article{f401baec79db4f0ba87e86e2af9d2239,

title = "Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts",

abstract = "Observations of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) provide valuable comparative data for understanding the significance of conspecific killing. Two kinds of hypothesis have been proposed. Lethal violence is sometimes concluded to be the result of adaptive strategies, such that killers ultimately gain fitness benefits by increasing their access to resources such as food or mates. Alternatively, it could be a non-adaptive result of human impacts, such as habitat change or food provisioning. To discriminate between these hypotheses we compiled information from 18 chimpanzee communities and 4 bonobo communities studied over five decades. Our data include 152 killings (n = 58 observed, 41 inferred, and 53 suspected killings) by chimpanzees in 15 communities and one suspected killing by bonobos. We found that males were the most frequent attackers (92% of participants) and victims (73%); most killings (66%) involved intercommunity attacks; and attackers greatly outnumbered their victims (median 8:1 ratio). Variation in killing rates was unrelated to measures of human impacts. Our results are compatible with previously proposed adaptive explanations for killing by chimpanzees, whereas the human impact hypothesis is not supported.",

author = "Wilson, {Michael L} and Christophe Boesch and Barbara Fruth and Takeshi Furuichi and Gilby, {Ian C.} and Chie Hashimoto and Hobaiter, {Catherine L.} and Gottfried Hohmann and Noriko Itoh and Kathelijne Koops and Lloyd, {Julia N.} and Tetsuro Matsuzawa and Mitani, {John C.} and Mjungu, {Deus C.} and David Morgan and Muller, {Martin N.} and Roger Mundry and Michio Nakamura and Jill Pruetz and Pusey, {Anne E.} and Julia Riedel and Crickette Sanz and Schel, {Anne M.} and Nicole Simmons and Michel Waller and Watts, {David P.} and Frances White and Wittig, {Roman M.} and Klaus Zuberb{\"u}hler and Wrangham, {Richard W.}",

note = "Funding Information: Acknowledgements This study was funded by National Science Foundation grants BCS-0648481 and LTREB-1052693 and National Institutes of Health grant R01 AI 058715. Numerous additional sources of funding have supported the long-term studies that contributed data to this study. We thank J. H. Jones for statistical advice; L. Pintea for preparing the map for Extended Data Fig. 1b; I. Lipende and R. Lawrence for providing details on recent cases at Gombe and Kanyantale; S. Amsler for helping to calculate the range of the Kanyantale community, and the many field assistants who collected data. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright}2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.",

year = "2014",

month = sep,

day = "18",

doi = "10.1038/nature13727",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "513",

pages = "414--417",

journal = "Nature",

issn = "0028-0836",

publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",

number = "7518",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts

AU - Wilson, Michael L

AU - Boesch, Christophe

AU - Fruth, Barbara

AU - Furuichi, Takeshi

AU - Gilby, Ian C.

AU - Hashimoto, Chie

AU - Hobaiter, Catherine L.

AU - Hohmann, Gottfried

AU - Itoh, Noriko

AU - Koops, Kathelijne

AU - Lloyd, Julia N.

AU - Matsuzawa, Tetsuro

AU - Mitani, John C.

AU - Mjungu, Deus C.

AU - Morgan, David

AU - Muller, Martin N.

AU - Mundry, Roger

AU - Nakamura, Michio

AU - Pruetz, Jill

AU - Pusey, Anne E.

AU - Riedel, Julia

AU - Sanz, Crickette

AU - Schel, Anne M.

AU - Simmons, Nicole

AU - Waller, Michel

AU - Watts, David P.

AU - White, Frances

AU - Wittig, Roman M.

AU - Zuberbühler, Klaus

AU - Wrangham, Richard W.

N1 - Funding Information: Acknowledgements This study was funded by National Science Foundation grants BCS-0648481 and LTREB-1052693 and National Institutes of Health grant R01 AI 058715. Numerous additional sources of funding have supported the long-term studies that contributed data to this study. We thank J. H. Jones for statistical advice; L. Pintea for preparing the map for Extended Data Fig. 1b; I. Lipende and R. Lawrence for providing details on recent cases at Gombe and Kanyantale; S. Amsler for helping to calculate the range of the Kanyantale community, and the many field assistants who collected data. Publisher Copyright: ©2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved.

PY - 2014/9/18

Y1 - 2014/9/18

N2 - Observations of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) provide valuable comparative data for understanding the significance of conspecific killing. Two kinds of hypothesis have been proposed. Lethal violence is sometimes concluded to be the result of adaptive strategies, such that killers ultimately gain fitness benefits by increasing their access to resources such as food or mates. Alternatively, it could be a non-adaptive result of human impacts, such as habitat change or food provisioning. To discriminate between these hypotheses we compiled information from 18 chimpanzee communities and 4 bonobo communities studied over five decades. Our data include 152 killings (n = 58 observed, 41 inferred, and 53 suspected killings) by chimpanzees in 15 communities and one suspected killing by bonobos. We found that males were the most frequent attackers (92% of participants) and victims (73%); most killings (66%) involved intercommunity attacks; and attackers greatly outnumbered their victims (median 8:1 ratio). Variation in killing rates was unrelated to measures of human impacts. Our results are compatible with previously proposed adaptive explanations for killing by chimpanzees, whereas the human impact hypothesis is not supported.

AB - Observations of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) provide valuable comparative data for understanding the significance of conspecific killing. Two kinds of hypothesis have been proposed. Lethal violence is sometimes concluded to be the result of adaptive strategies, such that killers ultimately gain fitness benefits by increasing their access to resources such as food or mates. Alternatively, it could be a non-adaptive result of human impacts, such as habitat change or food provisioning. To discriminate between these hypotheses we compiled information from 18 chimpanzee communities and 4 bonobo communities studied over five decades. Our data include 152 killings (n = 58 observed, 41 inferred, and 53 suspected killings) by chimpanzees in 15 communities and one suspected killing by bonobos. We found that males were the most frequent attackers (92% of participants) and victims (73%); most killings (66%) involved intercommunity attacks; and attackers greatly outnumbered their victims (median 8:1 ratio). Variation in killing rates was unrelated to measures of human impacts. Our results are compatible with previously proposed adaptive explanations for killing by chimpanzees, whereas the human impact hypothesis is not supported.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84907762429&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84907762429&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/nature13727

DO - 10.1038/nature13727

M3 - Article

C2 - 25230664

AN - SCOPUS:84907762429

SN - 0028-0836

VL - 513

SP - 414

EP - 417

JO - Nature

JF - Nature

IS - 7518

ER -

Lethal aggression in Pan is better explained by adaptive strategies than human impacts

Abstract

Bibliographical note

UN SDGs

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this