Search

Primate alarm calls are mainly hardwired but individuals need to adapt their calling behaviours according to the situation. Such learning necessitates recognising locally relevant dangers and may take place via their own experience or by observing others. To investigate monkeys alarm calling behaviour, we carried out a field experiment in which we exposed juvenile vervet monkeys to unfamiliar raptor models in the presence of audiences that differed in experience and reliability. We used audience age as a proxy for experience and relatedness as a proxy for reliability, while quantifying audience reactions to the models. We found a negative correlation between alarm call production and callers' age. Adults never alarm called, compared to juveniles. We found no overall effect of audience composition and size, with juveniles calling more when with siblings than mothers or unrelated individuals. Finally, concerning audience reactions to the models, we observed juveniles remained silent with vigilant mothers and only alarm called with ignoring mothers, whereas we observed the opposite for siblings: juveniles remained silent with ignoring siblings and called with vigilant siblings. Despite the small sample size, juvenile vervet monkeys, confronted with unfamiliar and potentially dangerous raptors, seem to rely on others to decide whether to alarm call, demonstrating that the choice of the model may play an important key role in the ontogeny of primate alarm call behaviour., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The alarm calls of nonhuman primates are occasionally cited as functionally equivalent to lexical word meaning in human language. Recently, however, it has become increasingly unlikely that one-to-one relations between alarm call structures and predator categories are the default, mainly because many call types are produced in multiple contexts, requiring more complex notions of meaning. For example, male vervet monkeys produce the same alarm calls during encounters with terrestrial predators and neighbouring groups, suggesting that recipients require additional information to attribute meaning to the calls. We empirically tested the hypothesis that vervet monkeys take contextual information into account when responding to each other's alarm calls. In playback experiments, we exposed subjects to recordings of male alarm barks during actual intergroup encounters (predator unlikely) or when there was no intergroup encounter (predator likely). Subjects responded more strongly in the no intergroup encounter situations, typically associated with discovering a hiding predator, measured in terms of startle responses, vigilance behaviour and gazing towards the presumed caller. We discuss the significance of using contextual information for meaning attribution in nonhuman primate communication., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The cognitive mechanisms causing intraspecific behavioural differences between wild and captive animals remain poorly understood. Although diminished neophobia, resulting from a safer environment and more "free" time, has been proposed to underlie these differences among settings, less is known about how captivity influences exploration tendency. Here, we refer to the combination of reduced neophobia and increased interest in exploring novelty as "curiosity", which we systematically compared across seven groups of captive and wild vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus) by exposing them to a test battery of eight novel stimuli. In the wild sample, we included both monkeys habituated to human presence and unhabituated individuals filmed using motion-triggered cameras. Results revealed clear differences in number of approaches to novel stimuli among captive, wild-habituated and wild-unhabituated monkeys. As foraging pressure and predation risks are assumed to be equal for all wild monkeys, our results do not support a relationship between curiosity and safety or free time. Instead, we propose "the habituation hypothesis" as an explanation of why well-habituated and captive monkeys both approached and explored novelty more than unhabituated individuals. We conclude that varying levels of human and/or human artefact habituation, rather than the risks present in natural environments, better explain variation in curiosity in our sample of vervet monkeys., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Experimental studies of animal social learning in the wild remain rare, especially those that employ the most discriminating tests in which alternative means to complete naturalistic tasks are seeded in different groups. We applied this approach to wild vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus aethiops) using an artificial fruit ('vervetable') opened by either lifting a door panel or sliding it left or right. In one group, a trained model lifted the door, and in two others, the model slid it either left or right. Members of each group then watched their model before being given access to multiple baited vervetables with all opening techniques possible. Thirteen of these monkeys opened vervetables, displaying a significant tendency to use the seeded technique on their first opening and over the course of the experiment. The option preferred in these monkeys' first successful manipulation session was also highly correlated with the proportional frequency of the option they had previously witnessed. The social learning effects thus documented go beyond mere stimulus enhancement insofar as the same door knob was grasped for either technique. Results thus suggest that through imitation, emulation or both, new foraging techniques will spread across groups of wild vervet monkeys to create incipient foraging traditions.