Back

Copulation calls indicate fertility but do not reflect female mate competition in wild Guinea baboons

Niederbremer, C.; Dal Pesco, F.; Mundry, R.; Neumann, C.; Diakhate, N.; Fischer, J.

2026-09-01 animal behavior and cognition
10.64898/2026.08.26.747217 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Across different modalities, signals play a core role in attracting mates and influencing mating success. In several non-human primate species, females produce calls during mating that are thought to promote male competition over receptive females. The extent to which social system characteristics modulate the function of copulation calls remains less clear. We studied copulation calls in wild Guinea baboons (Papio papio), who live in a multilevel society structured around units in which females associate and mate almost exclusively with a single male. We hypothesised that females use copulation calls as an indirect form of mate competition, with competition increasing in larger units. In addition, we hypothesised that females are more likely to mate again after calling. We analysed 6116 copulations between 2014 and 2025, involving 99 reproductively active females and 78 subadult and adult males. Females produced copulation calls in 72.7% of copulations, with large inter-individual variation. Neither unit size nor its interaction with the female's swelling size or the presence of simultaneously receptive females affected the probability of calling. A survival analysis with a subset of the data (2353 copulations) revealed no effect of calling on the latency to the next mating. Our results render the hypothesis that female Guinea baboons use calls in indirect mate competition unlikely. Yet, the probability of calling varied with sexual swelling size, suggesting that calls signal female fertility. Possibly, Guinea baboon copulation calls represent an evolutionary remnant, no longer under selective pressure, and can be considered index signals of female fertility.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.