MPIG 2013 Poster

Here's my poster for MPIG 2013.

ABSTRACT:

Gestural communication is thought to be a precursor to the origin of human language. Since human language is lateralized between brain hemispheres, is there also a lateralization in gestural communication in nonhuman primates?

This preliminary study sought to elucidate whether the hamadryas baboon (Papio hamadryas) troop at the Prospect Park Zoo in Brooklyn, New York exhibits hand preference in gestural communication. Two types of gestural communication were examined: hand slapping and muzzle wiping. An all occurrence sampling method was completed in 3 weeks with a total of 24 hours of observation and data collection. The Handedness Index (HI) for each individual (N=7) was calculated for both hand slapping and muzzle wiping.

This study revealed that most P. hamadryas individuals at the Prospect Park Zoo exhibit a right hand preference for hand slapping, but exhibit no hand preference for muzzle wiping. These results are consistent with previous studies on another baboon species, olive baboons (Papio anubis) (Vauclair et al., 2005; Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2006; Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2009). Results from this preliminary study can contribute to the study of nonhuman primate handedness, as well as the evolution of language.

Nonhuman Primate Handedness: Is there is a population-level preference?

Do you write with your left hand or right hand? When ask to open a jar, do you use your left or right hand? A handful of "tasks" can be used to determine your hand preference. Just because someone uses their right hand to write doesn't automatically makes them a right-handed person; some cultures frown upon left hand use and taught left-handed children to write with their right hand.

Humans are usually righties (right-handed), preferring to use their right hands for most manual tasks. Most, I said, because there are instances where reaching over with the closest hand would suffice. About 70% to 90% of the world population is right-handed. Then you have the lefties (left-handed) who basically are going to hell because they are the devil's minion (no, not really LOL!). Sprinkled among them are the ambidextrous, those that use their left and right hand with no preference. But is this true in nonhuman primates? Ever wonder if other primates have hand preference like we do?

Handedness is due to the lateralization of the brain hemispheres (Knecht et al., 2000). Individuals that are right-handed have a more dominant left brain hemisphere, while those that are left-handed have a more dominant right brain hemisphere. In most humans (Homo sapiens), the left brain hemisphere is more dominant, thus the majority of the human population is right-handed (Knecht et al., 2000). The human left brain hemisphere is also involved in language and is where Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area are located (Knecht et al., 2000). Broca’s area is involved in speech production while Wernicke’s area is involved in language comprehension. Lateralization results in a preference for handedness in humans (Knecht et al., 2000). That is, an individual is left-handed or right-handed due to brain lateralization, while ambidextrous individuals are not lateralized at all.

A meta analysis by McGrew and Marchant (1997) on hand laterality in nonhuman primates concluded that nonhuman primates do not show patterns of hand preference. Instead, the authors claim that even though individuals might be lateralized and have a preference for either left or right hand, there is no evidence that hand preference exists in population-level. The only nonhuman primates that have a population bias in handedness are chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) but are from captive populations (McGrew & Marchant, 1997). The authors claim that patterns of handedness in nonhuman primates cannot be used as a theoretical framework for the evolution of handedness and brain lateralization in humans because only few primates display handedness and most are from captive settings (McGrew & Marchant, 1997).

However, Hopkins (1999) argued that the criteria used by McGrew and Marchant (1997) to measure individual and population-level handedness were inaccurate, therefore oversimplifying the results. Instead, Hopkins (1999) offered new methodologies and a theoretical framework to interpret population-level nonhuman primate handedness. While McGrew and Marchant (1997) claimed that population-level hand preference is absent in nonhuman primates, Hopkins (1999) argued that McGrew and Marchant (1997) had left out a few significant studies in their meta analysis which showed population-level handedness. These studies have shown that population-level hand preference can be found in captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus), and squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus) (Aruguete et al., 1992; Colell et al., 1995; Hopkins, 1995 ; Hopkins and de Waal, 1995; Hopkins et al., 1993; Shafer, 1997). Similar studies on prosimians (Ward et al., 1990; Ward et al., 1993), New World Monkeys (Diamond & McGrew, 1994; Westergaard & Suomi, 1993) Old World Monkeys (Fagot et al., 1991; Vauclair et al., 2005; Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2006; Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2009), and great apes (Hopkins & Morris, 1993) have also shown patterns of population-level hand preference. 

A study by Vauclair et al (2005) found that olive baboons (Papio anubis) have a population-level preference for right handedness when performing bimanual tasks but no significant preference in handedness when performing unimanual tasks. Later, Meguerditchian & Vauclair (2006) found that olive baboons (P. anubis) have a preference for right handedness when communicating. Specifically, olive baboons use their right hands to hand slap when presented with agonistic stimuli by experimenters. Subsequent study on communicative gestures and non-communicative actions in olive baboons suggests that preference for right handedness may be due to the left brain hemisphere dominance, and that lateralization may have favored right handedness in communicative gestures as opposed to pure motor functions in unimanual tasks (Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2009).

Picture of an adult Olive baboon performing the TUBE task. (Vauclair et al., 2005)

Although there were a few studies on hand preference in Old World monkeys, only rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) (Fagot et al., 1991) and olive baboons (Papio anubis) (Vauclair et al., 2005; Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2006; Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2009) were tested for hand preference. So far, no hand preference study has been published on hamadryas baboons (Papio hamadryas) to elucidate whether these baboons exhibit population-level handedness.


BLOGGER'S NOTE: I will be presenting a poster on hamadryas baboon hand preference in gestural communications at the Midwest Primate Interest Group (MPIG) 2013. Please read my next post for a PDF version of the poster.

REFERENCES:

Aruguete, M. S., Ely, E. A., and King, J. 1992. Laterality in spontaneous motor activity of chimpanzees and squirrel monkeys. Am. J. Primatol. 27: 177-188.

Colell, M., Segarra, M. D., and Pi, J. S. 1995. Manual laterality in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) in complex tasks. J. Comp. Psychol. 109: 298-307.

Diamond, A.C., & McGrew, W.C. 1994. True handedness in the cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). Primates 35: 69-77.

Fagot, J., Drea, C.M., & Wallen, K. 1991. Asymmetrical hand use in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) in tactually and visually regulated tasks. Journal of Comparative Psychology 150: 260-268.

Hopkins, W.D. 1995. Hand Preferences for a Coordinated Bimanual Task in 110 Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): Cross-Sectional Analysis. Journal of Comparative Psychology 109(3): 291 - 297.

Hopkins, W.D. 1999. On the Other Hand: Statistical Issues in the Assessment and Interpretation of Hand Preference Data in Nonhuman Primates. International Journal of Primatology 20 (6).

Hopkins, W.D., & Morris, R.D. 1993. Handedness in great apes. A review of findings. International of Journal of Primatology 14: 1-25.

Hopkins, W. D., and de Waal, F. D. 1995. Behavioral laterality in captive bonobos (Pan paniscus): Replication and extension. Int. J. Primatol. 16: 261-276.

Knecht, S., Dräger, B., Deppe, M., Bobe, L., Lohmann, H., Flöel, A., et al. 2000. Handedness and hemispheric language dominance in healthy humans. Brain 123: 2512–2518.

McGrew W.C., & Marchant L.F. 1997. On the Other Hand: Current Issues in and Meta-Analysis of the Behavioral Laterality of Hand Function in Nonhuman Primates. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 40:201–232.

Meguerditchian, A. & Vauclair, J. 2006. Baboons communicate with their right hand. Behavioural Brain Research 171 (2006) 170–174.

Meguerditchian, A. & Vauclair, J. 2009. Contrast of hand preferences between communicative gestures and non-communicative actions in baboons: Implications for the origins of hemispheric specialization for language. Brain & Language 108 (2009) 167–174.

Shafer, D. D. 1997. Hand preference behaviors shared by two groups of captive bonobos. Primates 38: 303-313.

Vauclair et al., 2005. Hand preferences for unimanual and coordinated bimanual tasks in baboons (Papio anubis). Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 25(1): 210–216.

Ward, J.P., Milliken, G.W., & Stafford, D.K. 1993. Patterns of lateralized behavior in prosimians. In J.P. Ward & W.D. Hopkins (Eds.), Primate laterality: Current behavioral evidence of primate asymmetries (pp. 43-76). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Ward, J.P., Milliken, G.W., Dodson, D.L., Stafford, D.K., & Wallace, M. 1990. Handedness as a function of sex and age in a large population of Lemur. Journal of Comparative Psychology 104: 167-173.

Westergaard, G.C., & Suomi, S.J. 1993. Hand preference in capuchin monkeys varies with age. Primates 34: 295-300.

What spooked the hamadryas baboons at Emmen Zoo?

Someone or something done did spooked the hamadryas baboons at Emmen Zoo in Netherlands last week. All 112 baboons in this Dutch zoo were exhibiting rather unusual behavior according to numerous news sources.

Here's what I gathered about the hysteria from different news sources:

• The hamadryas baboons in Emmen Zoo suddenly became hysterical last Monday. It took about an hour to get the baboons to go back into their night enclosure in the evening, which normally takes about a minute according to the zoo spokesman.
• For the next two days, one group sat in a tree and "refuse" to come down while another group sat on an exposed part of the island in the hot sun. This group later moved to a shadier location, but remained "depressed". The baboons were huddling together.
• The zoo keepers brought apples for the baboons (awww, they do love apples) but the baboons ignored the treat. Keepers also placed food above ground, which are normally hidden in the ground to elicit foraging. The baboons also ignored the food. It it not until the third day that the baboons started eating.
• "They [the baboons] would sit with their backs to the public. They wouldn't make much noise; 'it was rather silent, which is not normal for a baboon'", said Wijbren Landman, Emmen Zoo's press officer and biologist.
• "If one of the leaders is shocked by something than most of the colony will obey him and then the whole colony will be shocked. But what really caused one of the leaders to be shocked, well, we didn't find out", Landman added.
• This wasn't the first time these baboons were acting weird; it happened in 1994, 1997 and 2007 as well. In 2007, all the baboons were observed looking at a very specific direction. Since hamadryas baboons can live well over 30 years old, some of the individuals in the zoo have experience previous hysteria.

OK I used a lot of air quotes but bare with me on this one. If you really want to look at animal behavior and why animal exhibit these behaviors, one mustn't anthropomorphize the behaviors. The worse is when the baboons were described as being depressed. Or when the NPR article asks why the baboons were so sad. So instead of saying that the baboons were sad or depressed, one could say that the baboons were lethargic or not moving a lot? At least that's how I feel about it. But whatever, it's the news and not a scientific journal. 

Some of the theories put forth as to what had spooked the baboons:

Lighting and thunder

Probable. Maybe there was a thunder that strike near the zoo.

Earthquake

Though there no records of earthquakes in or around Emmen Zoo but the area does occasionally experience minor earthquakes. Did they felt something that wasn't on the radar, so to speak?

Aliens or UFO

This is not the History Channel. Let's not go there.

Predators such as a snakes, foxes or aerial predators

Very unlikely. Again, if they are easily spooked by other animals then there would have been more episodes of hysteria. According to Landman who consulted a "French baboon expert", hamadryas baboon exhibit hysteria in the wild, triggered by awareness of a predator but for a relatively short period of time.

Zoo visitors

Zoo visitors might have spooked the baboons or maybe wore a T-shirt that has a picture of a predator (according to one of the news article, a lion). This is also very unlikely. Probable but unlikely. Just like the predator explanation, the baboons would have exhibited more frequent episodes of hysteria. But there might be other ways that the zoo visitors had unintentionally spooked these baboons. Maybe wearing a specific type of clothing. The baboons I worked with reacts aggressively towards visitors that wear trench coats (I would too, ewww the 90s called and they want their clothes back). 

So what do I think spooked the baboons? I'm gonna go with the unpopular opinion. I think it is a fear response towards zoo visitors. But what spooked them? For the fourth time in 20 years? Your guess is as good as mine. Wish I was there to observe their behavior though!

Any guesses on why the baboons were spooked?

References:

Why Were The Baboons So Sad? Many Theories, No Answers from NPR

Mysterious Apathy: Baboons Go on Strike in Dutch Zoo from Spiegel online 

Spooked baboons baffle Dutch zoo in Emmen from BBC

Baboons At Emmen Dierenpark In The Netherlands Baffle Dutch Visitors, Zoologists from Huffington Post

Baboon updates from Emmen Zoo.

All photos from Spiegel Online.

Prospect Park Zoo's Baby Hamadryas Named Azizi and Jabari

After more than a thousand suggestions submitted by the public, the two baby hamadryas baboons at Prospect Park Zoo are given the name "Azizi" and "Jabari" respectively. Their names are in Arabic, the language spoken in modern day Egypt (where these baboons can be found). "Azizi" means precious while "Jabari" means brave. Both Azizi (mother, Rebecca) and Jabari (mother, Kaia) are on exhibit daily from 10 AM to 2 PM inside the Animal Lifestyles building.

More at:
Azizi and Jabari, Prospect Park Zoo's newest baboons, get monikers inspired by their ancestry by Daily News.

The Vote Is In: Meet Jabari and Azizi from Prospect Park Zoo.

Wordless Wednesday

Help Name The Prospect Park Zoo Baby Baboons

Congratulations to Bole for being the father to two healthy and beautiful babies! Born on July 23rd and July 28th respectively, these two babies are a bundle of joy for mothers Kaia and Rebecca. The last time Prospect Park Zoo had a baboon birth was 6 years ago, a male baboon named Kito to mother Matara and father Simen.

Kaia and Rebecca (both 7 years old) were sent from Bucknell University to breed with Bole, a longtime resident of the hamadryas baboon exhibit at Prospect Park Zoo. For now, the babies are referred to #1 and #2 but that will change come September 24th. Prospect Park Zoo is asking you to submit names for these two fur balls no later than September 21st. Then, on September 24th, the zoo will announce the winning names. To suggest names, please visit Prospect Park Zoo's website here.

Photographs by Julie Larsen Maher ©WCS

Baby hamadryas baboons are born with black fur (pelage). As they mature, their fur changes from black to olive brown. Adult hamadryas baboons are grayish (males) or brownish (females). Hamadryas baboons were once considered sacred by the ancient Egyptians because these baboons were the attendant of the god Thoth.

Personally, the birth announcement was an exciting news because I've come to "know" Bole after spending almost a year observing him at Prospect Park Zoo. The 18 year-old Bole were especially closed to one of his three females, Zula. Together with Zula, Bole can been seen obsessively grooming each other up to the point where both of them had bare patches of skin. That, my friend, is one extreme PDA!

Without a doubt, the introduction of Kaia and Rebecca into Bole's group will change the troop's dynamics but I am very curious to see what the changes are to Bole's group. What will happen with the relationship between Bole and his three original females (Zula, Mekele and Kobo)? My recent observations suggest that Mekele and Kobo had moved from Bole's group into Simen's group. While I probably won't know the exact reasons why they would do so, I'm guessing that these lower ranking females are joining a much more dominant group for better access to food resources (higher ranking members get access to more preferable pieces of fruit, etc.).

Read more about the baby baboon here.

Luigi Fossati: A forgotten early primatologist

Can we really take into accounts early observations and writings of non "scholarly" works when it comes to the study of animals? Should we ignore written observations of animals behaviors and ecology if it wasn't written by an academic in a scholarly manner? A paper I found recently details the early work of an Italian army officer named Luigi Fossati and his observations on hamadryas baboons in Eritrea, Africa. In their paper, Luigi Fossati: A forgotten early primatologist and his observations on hamadryas baboons (Papio hamadryas) in Eritrea, Gippoliti and Majolo (2006) described some of Fossati's observations and compared them with what is currently known on hamadryas baboons. But before that, here's a little bit about Fossati.



View Larger Map

Eritrea, in relations to other African countries.

Luigi Fossati was an Italian army officer that spent a few year in Eritrea in the 1920's (Eritrea was an Italian colony until the Second World War). Before he went to Eritrea, he already had a strong interest in animals, ranging from the interactions between different animal species and behaviors of lesser known mammal species of that time. Upon returning to Italy in late 1920's, he published several books and papers on hunting and on the behaviors of various Eritrean mammals and birds. The first six chapter of Fossati's (1930) book, Uod Baracà (figli selvage) ed altre storie id bestie selvagge dell'Eritrea, is about his observations on hamadryas baboons in Eritrea. In this presumably early primatological field work, Fossati's observation was done on Mt. Gaab in the Aidereso Valley, near Asmara. Although I can't get my hands on Fossati's book nor am I able to read Italian, Gippoliti and Majolo's paper (2006) comes in handy. They compared some of Fossati's observations to what we currently know about hamadryas baboons and hoped that Fossati's work will be recognized by the scientific community and be considered one of the first field primatologists.

Here are what Fossati observed and published:

• Adult hamadryas males often interact with and protect juveniles and infants. Contemporary studies show that these male-infant relationship tend to reduce the risk of infanticide by other males, reduce agonistic male-male interactions and favor female mate choice (females more likely to mate with males that has strong male-infant relationships).
• Males move to new groups when they reach adulthood while females stay in their own group. He observed dispersing males acquire females from the older males of the same or different bands to form new "families" (one male unit) but before doing so, these males may spend a long period of time alone. Fossati's observation on the pattern of dispersion can be supported in contemporary literature. It is interesting to note that while females have been observed moving from one group to another, they only do so within the same band. Some females, however, are kidnapped into a different band by adult males (which is not a true dispersal). Studies have shown that dispersion significantly increase mortality rate.
• Interspecies association between a solitary male baboon and vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus aethiops). Fossati observed that the dispersing baboon followed a group of vervet monkeys for a few days and spending a close distance with them. He hypothesized that such association was mainly due to predator avoidance, using these vervet monkeys to increase the chance to detect predator.
• Response to various predators in different ways according to the type of predator present. He also observed that the baboons responded appropriately to alarm calls given by other species. Recent studies show that hamadryas baboons have a relatively limited range calls. These baboons not only listen to alarm calls from their conspecific but also from other species.
• Reported the first written account of predation of a juvenile baboon from a Verreaux's eagle (Aquila verreauxii). The first description of the Verreaux's eagle as a potential predator of baboons was published in a scientific journal 70 years after Fossati's published work by Zinner and Pelàez (1999).

Fossati was clearly able to identify and document the behaviors of hamadryas baboons in Eritrea while he was stationed there in 1920's. Gippoliti and Majolo brought up convincing reasons why Fossati's work should be recognized as one of the early primatologists. I think we should re-evaluate how we do research by not only cite "famous" works but to cite any relevant publications out there. I do agree with Gippoliti and Majolo on the importance of early observations that are conducted when human impact on habitat characteristics was minor or irrelevant.

NOTE: A copy of Luigi Fossati: a forgotten early primatologist and his observations on Hamadryas Baboons (Papio Hamadryas) in Eritrea (Gippoliti & Majolo; 2006) can be obtained by clicking on this link and requesting it from the University's website. The paper FREE to view but due to restrictions imposed by the publisher, I cannot attach the paper in this blog.

Reference:
Gippoliti, S. Majolo, B. 2006. Luigi Fossati: a forgotten early primatologist and his observations on Hamadryas Baboons (Papio Hamadryas) in Eritrea. Ethology, Ecology and Evolution 18 (1): 69-72.

Photo of the day: Prospect Park's Hamadryas baboons

November's unpredictable weather always make me sick, plus the stress from studying for GRE this year is not helping either. Don't really have time to do another blog post until Sunday so I figure I'll share with you a photo of me and Pam, one of the female hamadryas baboons from The Prospect Park Zoo. She usually sits on the ledge, pressed next to the display glass, when I do my observation there. Sometimes she would actually sit behind me to hide from rowdy zoo patrons (you know, the ones that like to bang on the glass to agitate them). Or maybe she's just trying to hide from me, heh. Pam's actual name is Kobo (according to the zoo) but I gave these hamadryas a different set of names for easy identification.

Anyways, if you ever visit The Prospect Park Zoo, Pam is the female hamadryas baboon with a very short tail. Don't forget to say hi to her but PLEASE don't bang on the glass ... she hates it.

Pam looking at me, lamenting about rowdy zoo patrons.

When Is A Monkey Really A Monkey?

A little boy pressed his nose on the glass where a Western Lowland Gorilla is interacting with the zoo-goers. He turns around to his parents with a big smile. “Oh look, the monkey wants to kiss you”, said his mother.

At the lemur exhibit, a girl asks her parents what those black and white primates were. Her dad picks her up and said, “It’s a monkey, sweetie … let’s go”.

A pair of gibbons gracefully swings around in their exhibit. Excited, a group of kindergarteners cheered as these gibbons maneuver around its habitat with great agility. “These monkeys are so active”, said the teacher.

If this sounds familiar to you then you are not alone. I spent a great deal of time near primate exhibits mainly because I love to observe their behaviors. I also enjoy watching interaction between humans and primates. However, there are times when I just can’t control myself and felt compelled to walk over to these people and explain to them that the word “monkey” is not a general term for primates (politely, of course). It shocks me that most of the time people do not read the information panel at the exhibit (aren’t zoo trips for educational purposes?). So when is a monkey really a monkey?

Monkey is a colloquial term for any cercopithecoids (Old World monkey) and platyrrhines (New World monkey). Monkeys are not hominoids (apes) or prosimians. One of the most distinctive characteristic that differentiate monkeys and apes is the presence of a tail in monkeys. Gibbons, siamangs, orangutans, gorilla, chimpanzees and bonobos are apes because they do not have a tail.

Gorillas do not have tails, so they are not monkeys but apes.

Differentiating monkeys and prosimians are a little tricky; all prosimians have grooming claws (toilet claws) but it is generally not visible within zoo exhibits. Prosimians include lemurs, lorises, galagos, aye-ayes and tarsiers.

A ring-tailed lemur is a prosimian. Although it has a tail, it also have grooming claws so lemurs are not monkeys.

A hamadryas baboon is technically a monkey because it has a tail but has no grooming claws.

The Barbary Macaque, Macaca sylvanus, was formerly named Barbary Ape due to the absence of a tail (to be more precise, they have a vestigial tail that looks like a stump). However, we know now that it is more closely related to macaques than to apes so its name was changed to correctly reflect what they are.

A Barbary Ape (notice the lack of tail). Flickr photo from Gerald Davison.

This brings us back to the question, “when is a monkey really a monkey’? The most straightforward answer would be “when it has a tail but doesn’t have grooming claws”. However, the most convenient answer usually lies in front of you … on the information panel.

Flickr photo taken by tim ellis at the Twycross Zoo, England.
The sign reads "Who are you calling a monkey?"

A Cross-Species Comparative Study: Grooming Patterns in Captive Populations of Hamadryas Baboons and Geladas

This is the thesis that I've been working on for the past year. Finally got it graded and I am really happy about the thesis. After writing this thesis, I have more follow-up questions pertaining to grooming than I had started with so I guess it's a good thing.

Thanks to Dr. Larissa Swedell for supervising my thesis. Also, thanks to Dr. Sara Stinson and Dr. Ekaterina Pechenkina for reading the thesis and your inputs.

Abstract:
Primates groom themselves (autogrooming) and each other (allogrooming) for a variety of purposes. Allogrooming is arguably an altruistic behavior, and may be explained by kin selection. The purpose of this study is to better understand the grooming patterns of captive hamadryas baboons (Papio hamadryas hamadryas) and geladas (Theropithecus gelada) within the context of kin selection theory, which posits that kin will interact, especially in altruistic ways, more than non-kin.

This study hypothesizes that grooming patterns in hamadryas baboons and geladas can be explained by the patterns of philopatry, dispersal, social system and bonding that are seen in wild populations. The results of this study show that there is a higher frequency of allogrooming than autogrooming in both hamadryas baboons and geladas. It also shows that gelada leader males groomed their females more than hamadryas leader males groomed their females, which does not support the hypothesis of this study. The following results showed a trend but were not statistically significant enough to support the hypotheses: female hamadryas baboons and geladas groomed more than male hamadryas baboons and geladas; hamadryas leader males groomed their females more than females groomed among themselves in the same hamadryas group; gelada females groomed each other more than gelada leader males and their females; male hamadryas baboons groomed more than male geladas; female geladas groomed more than female hamadryas baboons; hamadryas baboons groomed more than geladas.

In addition, this study also hypothesizes that there is a correlation between grooming frequency and temperature. There is a positive correlation between grooming frequency and temperature in hamadryas baboons but a negative correlation in geladas.

A Cross-Species Comparative Study: Grooming Patterns in Captive Populations of Hamadryas Baboons and Geladas

Hamadryas Baboons: Who's Who At The Prospect Park Zoo

EDIT: THIS IS NOT AN UP-TO-DATE LIST. SOME INDIVIDUALS HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED OUT OF THE ZOO AND NEW INDIVIDUALS HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN.


The hamadryas baboon troop at the Prospect Park Zoo are divided into two groups. Group #1 consists of 6 members: a one-male unit (OMU) with a female and 4 offspring. Group #2 consists of 4 members: a OMU with three females. Group #1 is dominant over Group #2. It took me a few visits to tell them apart, observing unique features in their face or body helps a lot. Also, these are not their real names given by the zoo. I find it easier to remember them if I name them myself. The baboon's "zoo name" is given in the bracket ( ). 

Group #1

Ben (Simen) is the leader male of Group #1 and also alpha male of the Prospect Park Zoo population. You can tell Ben apart from the other males because he has a mole underneath his left eye.

Mimi (Matara) is Ben's female. She is the mother of Fifi, Fadi, Neji and Ken. She is always near Ben and you can distinguish her from the rest of the females because she has a bigger belly and yellower fur. She is actually a hamadryas and olive baboon hybrid!

Fifi (Binti) is Ben and Mimi's daughter. She has a scar on the middle of her back and she is always seen with Ken and Neji.

Fadi (Moja) is Ben and Mimi's eldest son. He likes to be alone most of the time and can be seen near Neji a lot to groom him or be groomed by him. Fadi is a little bit tubbier than the rest of the males.

Neji (Nyali) is Ben and Mimi's middle son. He is a troublemaker. He has a scar on his lower left cheek. Neji likes to play with Ken and Fadi. Sometimes you can see Neji trying to herd Pam away from Leo.

Ken (Kito) is Ben and Mimi's youngest son. He is very energetic, much like any other child. Ken likes to hang around with Neji and Fifi.




Group #2

Leo (Bole) is the leader male of Group #2. He is lower ranking than Ben. Leo has a fuller and longer mane than Ben and Fadi. He is always seen with or close to Jenn, his favorite female.

Jenn (Zula) is Leo's female. She is higher ranking than Anne and Pam, and she is Leo's favorite. She can be seen with or near Leo most of the time. Due to obsessive grooming by Leo and her old age, she looks rather mangy. This picture was taken when she was on her estrus cycle (sexual swelling).

Anne (Mekele) is Leo's female. She is lower ranking than Jenn but higher ranking than Pam. She's pretty old with raggedy fur.

Pam (Kobo) is Leo's female. She is the lowest ranking of all females. She was easily recognizable by her short tail. She is herded away from Leo by Neji at times but she doesn't seem to mind as she enjoys grooming and getting groomed by Neji.

Promiscuous Girls: Calculating Baboons at Wellington Zoo Might Be Modifying Sex Cycle To Trick Their Mate

Ray Toble, a Victoria University Master of Science student said that female hamadryas baboons from Wellington Zoo, New Zealand are changing their sex cycle so that they have a higher chance to mate with someone other than their leader male. There are currently two harems in the zoo exhibit; one with three females and the one with six females. Toble found that females from the smaller harem had a fertile phases that's on average three days longer than the females in the larger harem.

Read more about the news article here.

Is this a behavior unique to Wellington Zoo population? Can this behavior be observed in other zoo populations and in the wild? I think more research and observation needs to be done on this topic but it is certainly fascinating to see that female hamadryas are calculated in their reproductive success. One thing I am not clear about, are there only two male hamadryas baboons at the Wellington Zoo or are these females increasing their chance to mate with male bachelors in the same exhibit.

What Is A Papio?

Prancing what? That is not a misspelled Spanish word, I did not intend for this blog to be named Prancing Papi. So, what really is a Papio?

Papio is a genus; all baboons belong to the genus Papio. Previously, Gelada, Mandrill and Drill were also grouped into the same genus but they now have their own separate genera. Gelada belongs to the genus Theropithecus while Mandrill and Drill belong to the genus Mandrillus. Gelada, Mandrill, and Drill are still colloquially referred to as baboons.

Currently the genus Papio has 5 recognized members. There are disagreements among scientists whether Hamadryas baboons are a separate species while the other four are subspecies or they all represent 5 different species of the same genus. You will see that Hamadryas baboons are listed as either Papio hamadryas or Papio hamadryas hamadryas.

Based on the biological species concept, I consider all 5 members of the genus Papio to be a subspecies of Papio hamadryas because they can reproduce and produce virile offspring hybrids. The closer the range of two baboon species, the higher the frequency of interbreeding is. This zone is sometimes call the hybrid zone. According to the ecological species concept, however, I consider all 5 members of the genus Papio to be 5 different species. So, depending on what your species concept is, there are different ways to classify them. How would you classify them and why?

The 5 Papio species are:

• Chacma Baboon, Papio ursinus (found in southern Africa).
• Guinea Baboon, Papio papio (found in the far western Africa).
• Hamadryas Baboon, Papio hamadryas (found in the Horn of Africa and south-western Arabia).
• Olive Baboon, Papio anubis (found in the north-central African savanna).
• Yellow Baboon, Papio cynocephalus (found in south-central and eastern Africa).

Male Hamadryas baboon (Papio hamadryas), The Prospect Park Zoo.

Hamadryas (Papio hamadryas) females. The Prospect Park Zoo.


Female Hamadryas and Olive baboon hybrid (Papio hamadryas x Papio anubis) The Prospect Park Zoo.