There were a number of excellent studies this week that I wasn’t able to write about (but I will continue to twitter those articles that strike my interest).

• Furuichi is one of the leading primatologists in the field, whose new book The Bonobos: Behavior, Ecology and Conservation has been receiving rave reviews. His new paper explores the differences between bonobos and chimpanzees and suggests ecological factors that could be tested to better understand their distinct evolutionary trajectories.

• Alvarez et al. look at the decline of the Spanish Hapsburg dynasty in the context of their inbreeding coefficient. After nearly two centuries of consanguineous marriages, Charles II ended up having a higher coefficient than if he had been the son of full siblings.

• McDonald examines the social networks within the leks of long-tailed manakins and demonstrates a striking example of cooperation between unrelated individuals.

• Cant and Johnstone look at the evolution of cooperation and seek to understand the regulation of aggression in social networks by applying the economic framework of the outside option principle.

• Finally, Gunza et al. suggest a more complicated emigration of modern humans out of Africa utilizing neurocranial geometry rather than modern genetic data.

Abstracts and links can be found below the fold. Enjoy. Happy Friday everybody.

Factors underlying party size differences between chimpanzees and bonobos: a review and hypotheses for future study.
Primates, 10.1007/s10329-009-0141-6
Takeshi Furuichi

Differences in party size and cohesiveness among females have been primary topics in socio-ecological comparisons of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus). This paper aims to review previous studies that attempted to explain these differences and propose some hypotheses to be tested in future studies. Comparisons of recent data show that relative party size (expressed as a percentage of total group size) is significantly larger for bonobos than chimpanzees. Although the prolonged estrus of females, close association between mother and adult sons, female social relationships including unique homosexual behavior, and high female social status might be related to the increased party size and female cohesiveness of bonobos, these social and behavioral factors alone do not appear to explain the differences between the two species. Differences in ecological factors, including fruit-patch size, density of terrestrial herbs, and the availability of scattered foods that animals forage as they travel between large fruit patches could also contribute to the differences between chimpanzees and bonobos. However, these factors cannot fully account for the increased party size and female cohesiveness of bonobos. The higher female cohesiveness in bonobos may be explained by socio-ecological systems that reduce the cost in feeding efficiency incurred by attending mixed-sex parties. These systems may include female initiatives for party ranging movements as well as the factors mentioned above. Because of their geographical isolation, the two species probably evolved different social systems. Chimpanzees, whose habitats became very dry during some periods in the Pleistocene, likely evolved more flexible fission–fusion social systems to cope with seasonal and annual variation in food availability. On the other hand, bonobos had a large refugia forest in the middle of their range even during the driest periods in the Pleistocene. Therefore bonobos, whose habitats had more abundant food and smaller variation in food availability, probably evolved systems that help females stay in mixed parties without incurring large costs from contest and scramble competition.

The Role of Inbreeding in the Extinction of a European Royal Dynasty.
PLoS One, 10.1371/journal.pone.0005174
Gonzalo Alvarez, Francisco C. Ceballos, Celsa Quinteiro

The kings of the Spanish Habsburg dynasty (1516–1700) frequently married close relatives in such a way that uncle-niece, first cousins and other consanguineous unions were prevalent in that dynasty. In the historical literature, it has been suggested that inbreeding was a major cause responsible for the extinction of the dynasty when the king Charles II, physically and mentally disabled, died in 1700 and no children were born from his two marriages, but this hypothesis has not been examined from a genetic perspective. In this article, this hypothesis is checked by computing the inbreeding coefficient (F) of the Spanish Habsburg kings from an extended pedigree up to 16 generations in depth and involving more than 3,000 individuals. The inbreeding coefficient of the Spanish Habsburg kings increased strongly along generations from 0.025 for king Philip I, the founder of the dynasty, to 0.254 for Charles II and several members of the dynasty had inbreeding coefficients higher than 0.20. In addition to inbreeding due to unions between close relatives, ancestral inbreeding from multiple remote ancestors makes a substantial contribution to the inbreeding coefficient of most kings. A statistically significant inbreeding depression for survival to 10 years is detected in the progenies of the Spanish Habsburg kings. The results indicate that inbreeding at the level of first cousin (F = 0.0625) exerted an adverse effect on survival of 17.8%±12.3. It is speculated that the simultaneous occurrence in Charles II (F = 0.254) of two different genetic disorders: combined pituitary hormone deficiency and distal renal tubular acidosis, determined by recessive alleles at two unlinked loci, could explain most of the complex clinical profile of this king, including his impotence/infertility which in last instance led to the extinction of the dynasty.

Young-boy networks without kin clusters in a lek-mating manakin.
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 10.1007/s00265-009-0722-9
David B. McDonald

I use 10 years of data from a long-term study of lek-mating long-tailed manakins to relate the social network among males to their spatial and genetic structure. Previously, I showed that the network connectivity of young males predicts their future success. Here, I ask whether kinship might shape the organization of this “young-boy network”. Not surprisingly, males that were more socially distant (linked by longer network paths) were affiliated with perch zones (lek arenas) that were further apart. Relatedness® among males within the network decreased as social distance increased, as might be expected under kin selection. Nevertheless, any role for indirect inclusive fitness benefits is refuted by the slightly negative mean relatedness among males at all social distances within the network (overall mean r = −0.06). That is, relatedness ranged from slightly negative (−0.04) to more negative (−0.2). In contrast, relatedness in dyads for which at least one of the males was outside the social network (involving at least one blood-sampled male not documented to have interacted with other banded males) was slightly above the random expectation (mean r = 0.05). The slight variations around r  = 0 among males of different categories likely reflect dispersal dynamics, rather than any influence of kinship on social organization. Relatedness did not covary with the age difference between males. These results, together with previous results for lack of relatedness between alpha and beta male partners, refute any role for kin selection in the evolution of cooperative display in this lek-mating system.

How Threats Influence the Evolutionary Resolution of Within‐Group Conflict.
The American Naturalist, 10.1086/598489
Michael A. Cant and Rufus A. Johnstone

Most examples of cooperation in nature share a common feature: individuals can interact to produce a productivity benefit or fitness surplus, but there is conflict over how these gains are shared. A central question is how threats to exercise outside options influence the resolution of conflict within such cooperative associations. Here we show how a simple principle from economic bargaining theory, the outside option principle, can help to solve this problem in biological systems. According to this principle, outside options will affect the resolution of conflict only when the payoff of taking up these options exceeds the payoffs individuals can obtain from bargaining or negotiating within the group; otherwise, threats to exercise outside options are not credible and are therefore irrelevant. We show that previous attempts to incorporate outside options in synthetic models of reproductive conflict fail to distinguish between credible and incredible threats, and then we use the outside option principle to develop credible synthetic models in two contexts: reproductive skew and biparental care. A striking prediction of our analysis is that outside options are least relevant to the resolution of conflict in cooperative groups of kin and are most relevant in transient associations or interactions among nonrelatives. Our analysis shows a way to link the resolution of within‐group conflict to the environmental setting in which it occurs, and it illuminates the role of threats in the evolution of social behavior.

Early modern human diversity suggests subdivided population structure and a complex out-of-Africa scenario.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 10.1073/pnas.0808160106
Philipp Gunza, Fred L. Booksteina, Philipp Mitteroeckera, Andrea Stadlmayra, Horst Seidlera and Gerhard W. Weber

The interpretation of genetic evidence regarding modern human origins depends, among other things, on assessments of the structure and the variation of ancient populations. Because we lack genetic data from the time when the first anatomically modern humans appeared, between 200,000 and 60,000 years ago, instead we exploit the phenotype of neurocranial geometry to compare the variation in early modern human fossils with that in other groups of fossil Homo and recent modern humans. Variation is assessed as the mean-squared Procrustes distance from the group average shape in a representation based on several hundred neurocranial landmarks and semilandmarks. We find that the early modern group has more shape variation than any other group in our sample, which covers 1.8 million years, and that they are morphologically similar to recent modern humans of diverse geographically dispersed populations but not to archaic groups. Of the currently competing models of modern human origins, some are inconsistent with these findings. Rather than a single out-of-Africa dispersal scenario, we suggest that early modern humans were already divided into different populations in Pleistocene Africa, after which there followed a complex migration pattern. Our conclusions bear implications for the inference of ancient human demography from genetic models and emphasize the importance of focusing research on those early modern humans, in particular, in Africa.