Epple G
Primates Med. 1978;10:50-62.
The field studies reviewed above raise some doubts about the laboratory concept of the extended family as the basic social unit of the Callithricidae. As Dawson [6] suggests, wild groups might more closely approximate artificial laboratory groups. They probably consist of a dominant, monogamous breeding pair, its dependent offspring and separate hierarchies of subdominant males and females who stay associated with the group for various lengths of time. Some of these subdominants might be offspring or relatives of the breeding pair. As the field studies show, these groups are more or less open to immigrants coming from other groups. They possibly tolerate transient relatives more easily and for longer periods of time than nonrelated individuals. In spite of the relative tolerance of wild groups towards strange conspecifics, it appears most practical to maintain laboratory breeders as families and remove the offspring after they have participated in the care of their younger siblings. In this way their reproductive capacities can be utilized as soon as their parental behavior has developed adequately. Moreover, possible losses caused by keeping nonrelated adults of the same sex together are avoided. As pointed out above, some species are very aggressive towards strange adult conspecifics and some seem to defend territories in the wild. It seems advisable therefore to house them in cages which provide a certain degree of isolation from neighboring groups. We have found this to be more important in S. fuscicollis than in C. jacchus, particularly in densely populated colony rooms. We therefore house our animals in cages which allow no visual contact with any other group, and by doing so have reduced the general level of excitement in the colony room. We believe that aggressive displays between groups are responsible for a large amount of redirected aggression between mates and for some of the abortions we have seen in our colony. Moreover, Rothe's [28, 29] observation that the parturient female withdraws from her group and gives birth in relative isolation should be taken into consideration when designing breeding cages. Although not all individuals of all species might show this behavior [see 32] it seems to be widespread enough to be an important factor in breeding efficiency and might figure in some of the infanticides observed by us and other authors.
上述实地研究对将大家庭作为狨科基本社会单位的实验室概念提出了一些质疑。正如道森[6]所指出的,野生群体可能与人工饲养的实验室群体更为相似。它们可能由一对占主导地位的一夫一妻制繁殖对、其依赖的后代以及处于从属地位的雄性和雌性组成的不同等级制度构成,这些从属个体与群体保持着不同时长的联系。其中一些从属个体可能是繁殖对的后代或亲属。正如实地研究所示,这些群体在一定程度上对来自其他群体的移民开放。与非亲属个体相比,它们可能更容易且更长时间地容忍临时亲属。尽管野生群体对陌生同种个体有相对的容忍度,但将实验室饲养者按家庭饲养,并在其参与照顾弟弟妹妹后将后代移出,似乎是最切实可行的做法。这样,一旦它们的亲代行为充分发展,其繁殖能力就能得到利用。此外,避免了将同性非亲属成年个体饲养在一起可能造成的损失。如上文所述,一些物种对陌生成年同种个体极具攻击性,有些在野外似乎会保卫领地。因此,将它们饲养在能与相邻群体保持一定隔离度的笼子里似乎是明智的。我们发现这对棕颈柽柳猴比对普通狨猴更为重要,尤其是在种群密集的饲养室中。因此,我们将动物饲养在彼此无法目视接触的笼子里,这样做降低了饲养室里的总体兴奋程度。我们认为群体间的攻击性展示是导致配偶间大量转移攻击行为以及我们在种群中观察到的一些流产现象的重要原因。此外,在设计繁殖笼时应考虑罗特[28, 29]的观察结果,即分娩的雌性会离开群体并在相对隔离的环境中分娩。尽管并非所有物种的所有个体都会表现出这种行为[见32],但这种行为似乎足够普遍,是繁殖效率的一个重要因素,并且可能与我们和其他作者观察到的一些杀婴现象有关。