Mutual tolerance or reproductive competition? Patterns of reproductive skew among male redfronted lemurs (Eulemur fulvus rufus)

Abstract

The social organization of gregarious lemurs significantly deviates from predictions of the socioecological model, as they form small groups in which the number of males approximately equals the number of females. This study uses models of reproductive skew theory as a new approach to explain this unusual group composition, in particular the high number of males, in a representative of these lemurs, the redfronted lemur ( Eulemur fulvus rufus ). We tested two central predictions of “concession” models of reproductive skew theory, which assume that subordinates may be allowed limited reproduction by dominant group members as an incentive to remain in the group, thereby increasing the group’s overall productivity. Accordingly, relatives are predicted to receive less reproduction than non-relatives, and the overall amount of reproductive concessions given to subordinates is predicted to increase as the number of subordinates increases. In addition, we tested whether the number of females in a group, a variable not previously incorporated in reproductive skew theory, affected reproductive skew among males. Using microsatellite analyses of tissue DNA, we determined paternities of 49 offspring born into our study population in Kirindy forest (western Madagascar) since 1996 to determine patterns of male reproductive skew to test these predictions. Our analyses revealed remarkable reproductive skew, with 71% of all infants being sired by dominant males, but both predictions of reproductive skew models could not be supported. Instead, the number of females best predicted the apportionment of reproduction among the males in this species, suggesting that current reproductive skew models need to incorporate this factor to predict reproductive partitioning among male primates and perhaps other group-living mammals.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 48 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.