ArticleMovement ecology2026
The immediate social environment dynamically shapes movement and foraging in wild Sumatran orangutans (Pongo abelii).
Article in Movement ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSocial associations have well-established costs and benefits, and likely play a fundamental role in shaping animals' movement. Individuals are predicted to balance the costs of associating, such as feeding competition, against key benefits, including social learning and mating opportunities, resulting in context-dependent movement patterns. However, the effects of the immediate social environment on movement remain poorly understood, likely because most movement ecology research focusses on either strictly group-living or solitary species. We investigate how social associations shape fine-scale movement patterns and food resource exploitation in wild, semi-solitary Sumatran orangutans (Pongo abelii) who show fission-fusion social dynamics. We integrated 16 years of spatial data on 72 individuals with detailed behavioural observations. We predicted that associations shape movement in ways that reflect distinct costs and benefits across age-sex classes.
methodsWe quantified the effects of associations on daily path length (a proxy for energetic investment in movement) using a continuous-time speed and distance (CTSD) approach, path sinuosity (as a measure of movement efficiency), and the use of key food hotspots (as an indicator of feeding competition and spatial knowledge). Using linear mixed models, we tested how these metrics varied with time spent in association and age-sex class, controlling for ecological factors.
resultsAcross all age-sex classes, daily path length increased with time in association, driven by longer active periods. At the population level, there was a trend towards straighter paths when individuals were with associates, though this depended on the class of the focal and the associate. Foraging behaviour was socially sensitive, with all age-sex classes visiting fewer feeding hotspots when in associations, and spending less time feeding within them. Social influences on movement and foraging were most apparent in mothers, although flanged males also exhibited significant behavioural effects, including the greatest reduction in overall feeding time when in the presence of unflanged males compared to when alone.
conclusionsTogether, these results suggest that social associations entail costs and benefits for orangutans that are tangibly reflected in their movement and foraging decisions. Furthermore, different age-sex classes showed distinct adjustments in movement depending on who they associated with, highlighting the dynamic nature of social influences on behaviour.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42919332What 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.