Group size and composition influence male and female reproductive success in black howler monkeys ( Alouatta pigra )

Abstract

It has been argued that grouping patterns might influence the reproductive performance of individuals. Increasing group size results in greater travel costs and competition over depletable food resources, which could lead to reduced individual reproductive success. However, in groups with an increasing number of males, female reproductive success is predicted to augment because larger male groups might better protect immatures from infanticidal attacks. In contrast, male reproductive success is predicted to decrease with number of males in a group because fertilization cannot be shared between males. In this paper, we test these predictions on the Mesoamerican black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra) with data on group size and composition for 120 groups from eight populations of black howler monkeys existing in eight protected forests in Mexico and Guatemala. Male and female reproductive success were calculated as a deviation of the observed number of infants (or immatures) from the expected number of infants (or immatures), relative to the number of males and females in a group. Results indicate that both male and female reproductive success decreased with group size. Male reproductive success decreased with an increasing number of males in a group and with increasing proportion of males relative to females in a group. Decreased female reproductive success was associated with increasing number of females in a group, and female reproductive success had a tendency to increase with increasing number of males in a group. These results suggest that in black howler monkeys, living in larger groups might negatively affect the reproductive success of each member. Our findings are similar to those reported for a population of a sister species, Alouatta palliata, living in larger groups.

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 — 88 citations exist upstream.

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