Essay On Primates

Throughout the animal kingdom, a variety of species are known to form polyspecific associations. Polyspecific associations are relationships formed between two or more animal species that result in a mutual benefit for all involved. Examples of such relationships have been seen in invertebrates, fish, birds and mammals, which indicate that this is a widespread behavioral strategy (Rehg, J. A., 2017). A common source of these relationships is among primate species, because polyspecific associations are more common among closely related taxa of animals with similar adaptations and are dependent on one or more species likely another. In the case of primates, most bonds form between organisms within the same family, subfamily, or genus (Rehg, J.

As we look back at the primates listed throughout this paper, four common themes arise in the creation of such relationships: predation, diet, body size, and group size. The human population seems to defy all four trends, by being a dominant predator that exploits resources with its relatively large body size, and extremely large group sizes. In other words, any possible relationship between humans and other primates often result in the exploitation of the other species and in some cases the extinction of the other species as a whole. Still, as humans continue to to advance further into nonhuman primate habitats, impromptu interactions between humans and other primates become inevitable. Areas such as agriculture and religion have initiated several interactions that could be argued as unnatural polyspecific associations, because the benefits toward the human participants are a little strange. What I mean by this is that the benefits given to the humans are not directly necessary for survival, but instead just make human life easier, as in the case of cashew farmers, or provide social benefits, seen in the temple monkeys. Regardless of these benefits, I argue that these interactions are not polyspecific associations but rather a response to habitat