IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v21y2010i4p747-752.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial dynamics and the evolution of social monogamy in mammals

Author

Listed:
  • F. Stephen Dobson
  • Brittany M. Way
  • Claude Baudoin

Abstract

Social monogamy is an uncommon mating system among mammalian species, and several hypotheses have been suggested to explain its evolution. It is generally thought that low local population densities and widely spaced female home ranges, particularly small home ranges, may facilitate social monogamy. We tested these expectations with a complete data set on local density, home range area, and body mass for 64 mammalian species, 22 of which were described as socially monogamous and 42 as not socially monogamous (socially polygynous or polygynandrous). Larger samples were examined separately for local density (84 species) and home range size (129 species). We found that with or without statistical adjustments for body size and phylogeny, socially monogamous and nonmonogamous species appeared similar in local density and home range area. Thus, we found no support for the idea that low population densities and wide dispersion of small home ranges have favored the evolution of social monogamy. Given support for different hypotheses in studies of different species, we suggest multiple causes of social monogamy among mammalian species. Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • F. Stephen Dobson & Brittany M. Way & Claude Baudoin, 2010. "Spatial dynamics and the evolution of social monogamy in mammals," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 21(4), pages 747-752.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:21:y:2010:i:4:p:747-752
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arq048
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:21:y:2010:i:4:p:747-752. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.