ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2019
How can non-human primates inform evolutionary perspectives on female-biased kinship in humans?
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Environmental, sex-specific and genetic determinants of infant social behaviour in a wild primate.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Benefits of living closer to kin vary by genealogical relationship in a territorial mammal.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Patterns and consequences of age-linked change in local relatedness in animal societies.Nature ecology & evolution · 2022Article
- What's in a Moment: What Can Be Learned About Pair Bonding From Studying Moment-To-Moment Behavioral Synchrony Between Partners?Frontiers in psychology · 2020Review
- The expendable male hypothesis.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019Article
- The evolution of female-biased kinship in humans and other mammals.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rarity of female-biased kinship organization in human societies raises questions about ancestral hominin family structures. Such questions require grounding in the form and function of kin relationships in our close phylogenetic relatives, the non-human primates. Common features of primate societies, such as low paternity certainty and lack of material wealth, are consistent with features that promote matriliny in humans. In this review, I examine the role of kinship in three primate study systems (socially monogamous species, female-bonded cercopithecines and great apes) that, each for different reasons, offer insights into the evolutionary roots of matriliny. Using these and other examples, I address potential analogues to features of female-biased kinship organization, including residence, descent and inheritance. Social relationships are biased towards matrilineal kin across primates, even where female dispersal limits access to them. In contrast to the strongly intergenerational nature of human kinship, most primate kin relationships function laterally as the basis for cooperative networks and require active reinforcement. There is little evidence that matrilineal kin relationships in primates are functionally equivalent to descent or true inheritance, but further research is needed to understand whether human cultural constructs of kinship produce fundamentally different biological outcomes from their antecedents in primates. This article is part of the theme issue 'The evolution of female-biased kinship in humans and other mammals'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.