IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v36y2025i3p325-383..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral diversity and agonism are higher in larger groups among wild Costa Rican capuchins

Author

Listed:
  • Shasta E Webb
  • Silvia Carboni
  • Allegra N DePasquale
  • Rachel E Williamson
  • Saúl Cheves Hernandez
  • Ronald Lopez
  • Amanda D Melin

Abstract

Biologists have long been interested in the causes, costs, and benefits of group living. Within species, group sizes vary and affect the behavior of group members. Yet, few studies have investigated how behavioral diversity—defined here as the number of distinct behaviors occurring in a given time period—and frequency of agonistic behaviors relate to group size. Here, we test the predictions of the Resource Distribution Hypothesis. To do so, we analyzed >65,000 behavioral scans collected over 15 yr in Sector Santa Rosa, Costa Rica, on 214 white-faced capuchins inhabiting eight social groups. We found that cross-sectional behavioral richness and diversity was higher in larger groups than in smaller groups and that individuals in larger groups exhibited significantly higher behavioral richness and diversity across the day (longitudinally). We also found that agonism frequency at the group level was higher in larger groups, suggesting increased competition. Understanding these relationships provides insight into group dynamics, patterns of interindividual competition, and potential constraints on group size.

Suggested Citation

  • Shasta E Webb & Silvia Carboni & Allegra N DePasquale & Rachel E Williamson & Saúl Cheves Hernandez & Ronald Lopez & Amanda D Melin, 2025. "Behavioral diversity and agonism are higher in larger groups among wild Costa Rican capuchins," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 36(3), pages 325-383.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:36:y:2025:i:3:p:325-383.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/araf015
    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.

    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:36:y:2025:i:3:p:325-383.. 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.