ArticleScientific reports2021
Coordination during group departures and progressions in the tolerant multi-level society of wild Guinea baboons (Papio papio).
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Close encounters of the friendly kind: pacific between-group interactions in primates.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025Review
- Multi-level societies: different tasks at different social levels.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Vocal consensus building for collective departures in wild western gorillas.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Article
- Compromise or choose: shared movement decisions in wild vulturine guineafowl.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Drone Observation for the Quantitative Study of Complex Multilevel Societies.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Disentangling influence over group speed and direction reveals multiple patterns of influence in moving meerkat groups.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Baboon travel progressions as a "social spandrel" in collective animal behaviour.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral EcologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Collective movement of social groups requires coordination between individuals. When cohesion is imperative, consensus must be reached, and specific individuals may exert disproportionate influence during decision-making. Animals living in multi-level societies, however, often split into consistent social subunits during travel, which may impact group coordination processes. We studied collective movement in the socially tolerant multi-level society of Guinea baboons (Papio papio). Using 146 group departures and 100 group progressions from 131 Guinea baboons ranging in Senegal's Niokolo-Koba National Park, we examined individual success at initiating group departures and position within progressions. Two-thirds of attempted departures were initiated by adult males and one third by adult females. Both sexes were equally successful at initiating departures (> 80% of initiations). During group progressions, bachelor males were predominantly found in front, while reproductively active 'primary' males and females were observed with similar frequency across the whole group. The pattern of collective movement in Guinea baboons was more similar to those described for baboons living in uni-level societies than to hamadryas baboons, the only other multi-level baboon species, where males initiate and decide almost all group departures. Social organization alone therefore does not determine which category of individuals influence group coordination.
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.