Search for: All records

Pandemics caused by pathogens that originate in wildlife highlight the importance of understanding the behavioral ecology of disease outbreaks at human–wildlife interfaces. Specifically, the relative effects of human–wildlife and wildlife-wildlife interactions on disease outbreaks among wildlife populations in urban and peri-urban environments remain unclear. We used social network analysis and epidemiological Susceptible-Infected-Recovered models to simulate zooanthroponotic outbreaks, through wild animals’ joint propensities to co-interact with humans, and their social grooming of conspecifics. On 10 groups of macaques (Macacaspp.) in peri-urban environments in Asia, we collected behavioral data using event sampling of human–macaque interactions within the same time and space, and focal sampling of macaques’ social interactions with conspecifics and overall anthropogenic exposure. Model-predicted outbreak sizes were related to structural features of macaques’ networks. For all three species, and for both anthropogenic (co-interactions) and social (grooming) contexts, outbreak sizes were positively correlated to the network centrality of first-infected macaques. Across host species and contexts, the above effects were stronger through macaques’ human co-interaction networks than through their grooming networks, particularly for rhesus and bonnet macaques. Long-tailed macaques appeared to show intraspecific variation in these effects. Our findings suggest that among wildlife in anthropogenically-impacted environments, the structure of their aggregations around anthropogenic factors makes them more vulnerable to zooanthroponotic outbreaks than their social structure. The global features of these networks that influence disease outbreaks, and their underlying socio-ecological covariates, need further investigation. Animals that consistently interact with both humans and their conspecifics are important targets for disease control.

Despite increasing conflict at human–wildlife interfaces, there exists little research on how the attributes and behavior of individual wild animals may influence human–wildlife interactions. Adopting a comparative approach, we examined the impact of animals’ life-history and social attributes on interactions between humans and (peri)urban macaques in Asia. For 10 groups of rhesus, long-tailed, and bonnet macaques, we collected social behavior, spatial data, and human–interaction data for 11–20 months on pre-identified individuals. Mixed-model analysis revealed that, across all species, males and spatially peripheral individuals interacted with humans the most, and that high-ranking individuals initiated more interactions with humans than low-rankers. Among bonnet macaques, but not rhesus or long-tailed macaques, individuals who were more well-connected in their grooming network interacted more frequently with humans than less well-connected individuals. From an evolutionary perspective, our results suggest that individuals incurring lower costs related to their life-history (males) and resource-access (high rank; strong social connections within a socially tolerant macaque species), but also higher costs on account of compromising the advantages of being in the core of their group (spatial periphery), are the most likely to take risks by interacting with humans in anthropogenic environments. From a conservation perspective, evaluating individual behavior will better inform efforts to minimize conflict-related costs and zoonotic-risk.

Primatologists have long focused on grooming exchanges to examine aspects of social relationships, co‐operation, and social cognition. One particular interest is the extent to which reciprocating grooming partners time match, and the time frame over which they do so. Conclusions about time matching vary across species. Generally, researchers focus on the duration of pauses between grooming episodes that involve a switch in partner roles and choose a cut‐off point to distinguish short from longer‐term reciprocation. Problematically, researchers have made inconsistent choices about cut‐offs. Such methodological variations are potentially concerning, as it is unclear whether inconsistent conclusions about short‐term time matching are attributable to species/ecological differences, or are due in part to methodological inconsistency. We ask whether various criteria for separating short versus long‐term reciprocation influence conclusions about short‐term time matching using data from free‐ranging rhesus (Macaca mulatta) and captive‐crested macaques (Macaca nigra). We compare several commonly used cut‐offs to ones generated by the currently preferred approach—survival analysis. Crested macaques displayed a mild degree of time matching regardless of the cutoff used. For rhesus macaques, whereas most cut‐offs yielded similar degrees of time matching as the one derived from survival analysis, very short ones significantly underestimated both the degree of time matching and the influence of rank distance on time matching. Although researchers may have some flexibility in their choice of cut‐offs, we suggest that they employ caution by using survival analysis when possible, and when not possible, by avoiding very short time windows.