Orangutans have larger gestural repertoires in captivity than in the wild-A case of weak innovation?

Marlen Fröhlich, Natasha Bartolotta, Caroline Fryns, Colin Wagner, Laurene Momon, Marvin Jaffrezic, Tatang Mitra Setia, Caroline Schuppli, Maria A van Noordwijk, Carel P van Schaik
Author Information
  1. Marlen Fröhlich: Department of Anthropology, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  2. Natasha Bartolotta: Department of Anthropology, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  3. Caroline Fryns: Department of Anthropology, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  4. Colin Wagner: Département Ecologie, Physiologie et Ethologie, University of Strasbourg, 67037 Strasbourg, France.
  5. Laurene Momon: Département Ecologie, Physiologie et Ethologie, University of Strasbourg, 67037 Strasbourg, France.
  6. Marvin Jaffrezic: Département Ecologie, Physiologie et Ethologie, University of Strasbourg, 67037 Strasbourg, France.
  7. Tatang Mitra Setia: Fakultas Biologi, Universitas Nasional, 12520 Jakarta Selatan, Indonesia.
  8. Caroline Schuppli: Department of Anthropology, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  9. Maria A van Noordwijk: Department of Anthropology, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.
  10. Carel P van Schaik: Department of Anthropology, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.

Abstract

Whether nonhuman species can change their communicative repertoire in response to socio-ecological environments has critical implications for communicative innovativeness prior to the emergence of human language, with its unparalleled productivity. Here, we use a comparative sample of wild and zoo-housed orangutans of two species () to assess the effect of the wild-captive contrast on repertoires of gestures and facial expressions. We find that repertoires on both the individual and population levels are larger in captive than in wild settings, regardless of species, age class, or sampling effort. In the more sociable Sumatran species, dominant use of signals toward single outcomes was also higher in captive settings. We thus conclude that orangutans exposed to more sociable and terrestrial conditions evince behavioral plasticity, in that they produce additional innate or innovated signals that are highly functionally specific. These findings suggest a latent capacity for innovativeness in these apes' communicative repertoires.

Keywords

References

  1. Curr Biol. 2007 Aug 7;17(15):1345-8 [PMID: 17683939]
  2. Primates. 2009 Jan;50(1):56-64 [PMID: 19052691]
  3. Primates. 1999 Jan;40(1):69-86 [PMID: 23179533]
  4. Anim Cogn. 2017 Jul;20(4):755-769 [PMID: 28502063]
  5. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 2011 Jan;65(1):47-55 [PMID: 21297852]
  6. Anim Behav. 2007 Feb;73(2):281-286 [PMID: 17389908]
  7. PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36180 [PMID: 22586464]
  8. Child Dev. 1992 Oct;63(5):1186-97 [PMID: 1446548]
  9. Evolution. 1996 Dec;50(6):2471-2487 [PMID: 28565664]
  10. Behav Brain Sci. 2007 Aug;30(4):393-407; discussion 407-32 [PMID: 18081967]
  11. Anim Cogn. 2018 Sep;21(5):619-629 [PMID: 29876698]
  12. Folia Primatol (Basel). 2007;78(1):36-45 [PMID: 17170555]
  13. Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Oct 22;276(1673):3689-94 [PMID: 19656794]
  14. Am J Primatol. 2014 Jan;76(1):14-29 [PMID: 24038115]
  15. Biol Lett. 2012 Aug 23;8(4):498-501 [PMID: 22438489]
  16. Evol Psychol. 2013 Jul 18;11(3):538-49 [PMID: 23864293]
  17. Curr Biol. 2014 Jul 21;24(14):1596-1600 [PMID: 24998524]
  18. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2020 Oct;95(5):1167-1197 [PMID: 32307892]
  19. Anim Behav. 1999 Oct;58(4):825-830 [PMID: 10512656]
  20. Biol Philos. 2020;35(5):55 [PMID: 33093737]
  21. Nat Ecol Evol. 2019 Jul;3(7):1039-1042 [PMID: 31133723]
  22. Behav Ecol. 2009 Mar;20(2):416-420 [PMID: 19461866]
  23. Anim Cogn. 2019 Jul;22(4):577-595 [PMID: 30196330]
  24. Anim Cogn. 2010 Jan;13(1):33-40 [PMID: 19504272]
  25. Am J Primatol. 2015 Nov;77(11):1216-29 [PMID: 26317698]
  26. PeerJ. 2018 Jul 31;6:e5303 [PMID: 30083451]
  27. Dev Psychol. 1998 Sep;34(5):813-22 [PMID: 9779730]
  28. Anim Cogn. 2010 Nov;13(6):793-804 [PMID: 20563619]
  29. Primates. 2020 Mar;61(2):225-235 [PMID: 31894436]
  30. Anim Cogn. 2016 May;19(3):483-500 [PMID: 26833496]
  31. Sci Am. 1960 Sep;203:89-96 [PMID: 14402211]
  32. Anim Cogn. 2013 Jul;16(4):653-66 [PMID: 23370783]
  33. Curr Biol. 2011 Apr 26;21(8):687-91 [PMID: 21497089]
  34. Commun Biol. 2021 Jul 27;4(1):917 [PMID: 34316012]
  35. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2020 Jul;11(4):e1527 [PMID: 32180368]
  36. Primates. 2010 Apr;51(2):101-18 [PMID: 20072848]
  37. Evol Anthropol. 2012 Sep-Oct;21(5):195-205 [PMID: 23074065]
  38. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Feb 27;115(9):1974-1979 [PMID: 29432157]
  39. Biol Lett. 2019 Jul 26;15(7):20190209 [PMID: 31311488]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0speciesrepertoirescommunicativeinnovativenessusewildorangutanslargercaptivesettingssociablesignalsbehaviorWhethernonhumancanchangerepertoireresponsesocio-ecologicalenvironmentscriticalimplicationsprioremergencehumanlanguageunparalleledproductivitycomparativesamplezoo-housedtwoassesseffectwild-captivecontrastgesturesfacialexpressionsfindindividualpopulationlevelsregardlessageclasssamplingeffortSumatrandominanttowardsingleoutcomesalsohigherthusconcludeexposedterrestrialconditionsevincebehavioralplasticityproduceadditionalinnateinnovatedhighlyfunctionallyspecificfindingssuggestlatentcapacityapes'Orangutansgesturalcaptivitywild-Acaseweakinnovation?AnthropologyWildlifeZooanimal

Similar Articles

Cited By