Anita. Behav., 1985, 33, 1043-1051

Book Reviews

Primate Paternal&m. Edited by DAVID MILTON TAUB. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold (1984). Pp xii +441. Price $44.00.

Male mammals frequently appear to be uninter- ested in infant care, and any occurrence of paternal care becomes so unusual as to hold a special fascination. What do males do with infants? How competent is their behaviour towards infants? What benefits, if any, result to the male or the infant? What theoretical explanations can account for the evolution of the paternal behaviour that is observed?

Primate Paternalism attempts to answer these questions. As the editor notes, many of the pre- vious data on primate paternal care have been qualitative. His major goal in this book is to present a quantitative data base. The first 10 chapters consist of empirical studies of male-infant interac- tions in species ranging from tamarins to chimpan- zees, although eight chapters focus on macaques and baboons. Several new and important points emerge from these chapters. (1) Male care of infants is highly variable both within and between species. (2) Males in multi-male, muRi-female groups show more infant care than would be expected, based on previous theoretical assump- tions. (3) Paternal relatedness correlates with male- infant interactions in some studies, but not in others. (4) There are several alternatives to the hypothesis that the main function of male infant interactions is for agonistic buffering. (5) Males make a significant contribution to the survival of infants and infant care can contribute to male reproductive success.

Cebul & Epple present data on the monogamous saddle-back tamarin where paternal care has been assmned to be great. They show considerable variability in paternal care between groups and suggest that fathers have no unique role but are one of several helpers that can contribute to offspring SUCCESS.

Taub presents data suggesting that Barbary macaques show true paternal care, not only agonis- tic buffering. The only infant that died was the one without a relationship with a male. Since females accept copulations from all males, Taub suggests that males choose which infants to care for based on relatedness through matriline rather than on paternity.

Estrada found that juvenile males were more involved with infants than adults in free-ranging stump tail macaques. Infants typically sought the company of older males. Smith & Peffer-Smith

found that adult stump-tail macaques showed more paternal behaviour toward infants than would be predicted from the demography of the group. Special relationships were formed between individual males and infants and one male adopted an infant when its mother was removed. Vessey & Meikle found very low levels of male-infant inter- action in free-ranging rhesus macaques but they observed one case of adoption and one quasi-adop- tion. Males did not use infants in agonistic encounters nor to obtain access to females. The most dominant males provided most infant care, and infants tended to approach these males, sug- gesting that the infants benefit from the interaction. Gouzoules, studying free-ranging Japanese maca- ques, found no correlation of infant care with paternity, matriline, or agonistic behaviour. He also reported adoption by males, noting that females did not respond to orphaned infants. He argues that there is little cost to males in infant care since they do not have to nurse the infants and since the males are generally high-ranking. Parental certainty may be important to females, but not to males, in allocating care.

Strum studied wild baboons and found that 87% of male use of infants was in agonistic situations. The male using the infant had been in residence longer than the male the infant was being used against, suggesting that paternal certainty might be involved in the choice of infants. She suggests that males benefit from infants in tense situations, both from the contact comfort provided by the infant and the security that other group members will come to his aid if attacked. Since there is little cost to the infant, it is suggested that reciprocal altruism is the main mechanism in the evolution of infant care. Busse suggests an alternative interpretation based on his studies of wild baboons. All but one of the infant carriers observed could have fathered the infant. The carrier had been one of the most dominant males at the infant's conception, but at the time of usage he was of lower rank than an opponent that had immigrated to the group since the conception of an infant. Busse interprets his results as suggesting that the putative father was defending his infant against a potentially infantici- dal male immigrant. However, since the infant-car- rying males are also subordinate to the other males, Strum's explanation can also account for these data. Stein describes the ontogeny of male-infant interactions in wild baboons and finds two peaks, one in early infancy where the infants are used in agonistic encounters, and a second when the infant is 5 months old, in the dry season when food is least

1043

1044 Animal Behaviour, 33, 3

available. Both mother and infant feed near the male, and the infant eats korbs which the male has dug out and processed. Stein presents striking evidence that the male was likely to have fathered the particular infants it associated with. Finally, Davis provides a limited description of male-infant interactions in one pair of captive chimpanzees.

Three theoretical presentations follow the em- pirical chapters. Kurland & Gaulin present an extensive and interesting theoretical account of male-infant interactions drawing on data from other mammals, fishes, and birds as well as pri- mates. They distinguish between mating effort and parental effort and argue that some of the beha- viour that has been described as indirect parental care, such as group defence, is better conceptua- lized as effort invested in future matings rather than present parenting. They also include notions of body size, metabolic rate and ecological factors along with paternal certainty in predicting where biparental care should appefir. They argue that small animals with high metabolic rates have needs for relatively low-volume but high-quality food compared with larger primates. This leads to a limitation of group size, to territorial defence, monogamy and biparental care. The hypothesis helps to account for the territoriality and biparen- tal care in CaUitrichids, but does not so readily account for the monogamy, territoriality and un- iparental care in Hytobatids. Pook presents a new argument for the evolution of biparental care in Callitrichids that is quite similar to the general account of Kurland & Gaulin. He sees monogamy as a prerequisite to the multiple births of Callitri- chids rather than a consequence of phyletic dwar- fism and multiple births. Due to resource limi- tations, small group sizes have developed in many New World primates, and monogamy and biparen- talism are the only strategies possible for small groups. Hamilton attempts to provide a derivation of modern human social organization from multi- male, multi-female baboon groups through a pro- cess of fragmentation into facultative polygynous units which can coalesce into larger structured groups.

Three taxonomic reviews of paternal care con- clude the book. Vogt reviews the prosimians and New World primates. Taub & Redican review Old World primates and apes, while Lamb reviews human beings. He demonstrates that males and females do not differ in the quality and competence of infant care, but do differ in their time budgets. Human males are more willing to relinquish infant care to females than vice versa. This finding, coupled with the several examples in the book of male primates avidly adopting orphaned infants, suggests an alternative account of the infrequency

of male parental care. Male primates are not indifferent to infants and have the same potential for competence in infant care, but females, due to their absolute certainty of maternity, rarely relin- quish infants except in conditions where the male's help is essential.

Although several of the chapters were completed as long ago as 1980, the book, as a whole, is still quite timely. It will be of value not merely to primatologists but to all those interested in having a factual account of the varieties of mammalian paternal care.

CHARLES T. SNOWDON Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI53706, U.S.A.

Nest Building and Bird Behavior. By NICHOLAS E. COLUAS & ELSIE C. COLLIAS. Princeton: Prince- ton University Press (1984). Pp. xix + 336. Price $16-50 (paperback), $45.00 (hardback)

At the turn of the century the scientific study of nests was known as 'caliology'. If the term ever returns to the ornithological lexicon, then Nicholas and Elsie Collias will most certainly be dubbed our foremost caliologists. Their collaborative work of more than a quarter century, and now this compre- hensive and engaging volume, clearly distinguish them as authorities in this fascinating area of study. The scope of their book is much broader than its title suggests. Although nest construction is dis- cussed in detail, virtually all of the behaviour patterns and devices used by birds to protect their eggs and young are covered. Moreover, these are discussed within the larger context of their adaptive significance as well as their evolutionary, develop- mental and physiological origins. Some readers may dispute the inclusion of a detailed discussion of bower building, since a few ornithologists view bower building and nest building as unrelated. But the fact that the nests and bowers of some bower- bird species have some similarities (e.g. contain complex mixtures of grass stems or fine rootlets) probably justifies the inclusion. I might add that bower building is simply too fascinating to omit.

Although the authors range widely in selecting illustrative species, invariably they return to members of the Ploceidae, the weaver finches of African and Asia, for their most striking examples of complex nest construction. Through photo- graphs and drawings, many of them reproduced from the authors' monograph of 1964, we see the detailed records of extraordinary avian behaviour, The social weaver (Philetairus socius), a small