A Statistical Analysis of the Social Behavior of the Male Stumptail Macaque (Macaca arctoides) | Table II: Association of Facio-Vocal Activity with Acts and Postures | Page 21 |
Observed/expected frequencies (c) | ||||
Overall O/E (a) | Behaviors (b) | dominant (vs.sub.) |
dominant (vs.dom.) |
subordinate |
Offense, defense, and submission (d) | ||||
76.9 66.7 44.4 30.8 28.5 27.8 21.7 11.5 10.1 |
Scrm + Crch Fc31 + Lnge Fc31 + HtNC Fc13 + RnAw Fc23/33 + Crch Scrm + RnAw Fc13 + RstR Pant + RnAw Fc23/33 + RnAw |
0/.000 1/.006 0/.006 0/.020 0/.000 0/.000 2/.122 0/.028 1/.031 |
0/.000 3/.073 0/.000 0/.086 0/.000 0/.013 5/.157 1/.116 1/.311 |
6/.191 1/.018 4/.092 10/.290 7/.292 7/.403 0/.000 4/.290 6/.617 |
Sexual behavior | ||||
18.0 11.5 10.3 9.16 8.71 5.26 4.88 3.99 3.98 3.49 3.21 3.02 2.80 |
Pant + Auto FcTC + Mont FcLS + Auto Fc3X + Auto FcLS + Mont Exhl + Mstb FcLS + Mstb FcLS + Prst Fc21 + Mstb FcTC + Prst FcTC + Mstb Pant + Prst Fc23/33 + Prst |
0/.049 14/.602 2/.111 1/.089 6/.557 5/.143 4/.239 6/1.26 3/.420 5/1.36 2/.258 2/.553 3/.603 |
4/.458 13/2.23 8/1.29 5/.987 15/3.14 2/2.66 10/6.27 22/5.47 2/1.37 9/3.89 4/4.47 6/1.95 7/3.52 |
3/.044 0/.204 0/.101 2/.113 6/.298 3/.303 8/.927 5/2.48 5/.412 8/1.70 5/.636 2/1.10 7/2.43 |
Display | ||||
9.94 5.13 |
Bark + RBnce Bark + Ptrl |
7/1.14 5/1.43 |
10/1.41 1/.315 |
0/.013 2/.059 |
Grooming | ||||
6.72 | Chmp + SGrm | 0/.000 | 8/1.07 | 0/.000 |
Other behaviors | ||||
2.15 2.00 |
Fc4X + Sit Coo + Sit |
25/11.4 9/3.68 |
5/2.63 0/.000 |
12/5.22 14/8.70 |
(a) Ratio of observed to expected frequencies derived from a 2 X 2 contingency table including the two behaviors (facio-vocal activity and act or posture) and the total number of possible combinations over all animals in the study.
(b) Associations of facio-vocal activity and acts or postures. All such associations are listed that were significantly nonrandom for all pairings of animals at the 0.001 level of probability according to a Chi square or Fisher's exact probability test. See Table 1 for abbreviations.
(c) Observed frequency followed by frequency expected from calculations based on a 2 X 2 contingency table (see text).
(d) Approximate behavior categories.
(e) Calculation of the association of bark with repeated bouncing was done in terms of the occurrence in the same minute of testing rather than in the same behavioral event.
|
|
|