Social affiliation matters: Both same-sex and opposite-sex relationships predict survival in wild female baboons

listen audio

Study Justification:
– Social integration and support have significant effects on human survival.
– Understanding the extent of this phenomenon in non-human animals is important for understanding the evolution of lifespan and sociality.
– This study aims to investigate the effects of affiliative social behavior on survival in wild female baboons.
Study Highlights:
– The study found that adult female baboons who were socially connected to either adult males or adult females lived longer than socially isolated females.
– Females with strong connectedness to individuals of both sexes lived the longest.
– Female social connectedness to males was predicted by high dominance rank, indicating competition for access to male social partners.
– This study is one of the largest animal studies to examine the effects of social relationships on survival.
Study Recommendations:
– Further research should be conducted to explore the mechanisms through which social connectedness affects survival in baboons.
– Investigate the potential impact of other factors such as kinship and age on social connectedness and survival.
– Examine the effects of social connectedness on other aspects of baboon behavior and health.
Key Role Players:
– Researchers and scientists specializing in animal behavior and social dynamics.
– Wildlife conservation organizations and experts.
– Policy makers and government agencies responsible for wildlife management and protection.
Cost Items for Planning Recommendations:
– Research funding for data collection, analysis, and publication.
– Fieldwork expenses, including travel, accommodation, and equipment.
– Personnel costs for researchers, field assistants, and data analysts.
– Conservation and management initiatives to protect baboon populations and their habitats.
– Public awareness campaigns to promote the importance of social integration in wildlife conservation.

The strength of evidence for this abstract is 8 out of 10.
The evidence in the abstract is strong, but there are some areas for improvement. The study is based on a large dataset and examines the effects of social connectedness on survival in wild female baboons. The researchers collected behavioral and demographic data on a well-studied population of baboons over a period of 84 group-years. They used composite indices of social connectedness to measure the frequency of grooming behavior between individuals. The study found that females with strong social connectedness to both males and females lived longer than socially isolated females. The evidence is supported by the use of Cox proportional hazards models and the inclusion of relevant predictor variables. However, there are a few areas where the evidence could be strengthened. First, the authors mention that missing data were imputed, but they do not provide details on the imputation methods used. It would be helpful to have more information on how missing data were handled. Second, the authors mention that they used ad libitum observations of grooming behavior, but they do not provide information on inter-observer reliability or potential biases in the data collection. It would be beneficial to address these potential limitations. Overall, the evidence in the abstract is strong, but providing more information on data imputation methods and addressing potential biases in data collection would further strengthen the study.

Social integration and support can have profound effects on human survival. The extent of this phenomenon in non-human animals is largely unknown, but such knowledge is important to understanding the evolution of both lifespan and sociality. Here, we report evidence that levels of affiliative social behaviour (i.e. ‘social connectedness’) with both same-sex and opposite-sex conspecifics predict adult survival in wild female baboons. In the Amboseli ecosystem in Kenya, adult female baboons that were socially connected to either adult males or adult females lived longer than females who were socially isolated from both sexes—females with strong connectedness to individuals of both sexes lived the longest. Female social connectedness to males was predicted by high dominance rank, indicating that males are a limited resource for females, and females compete for access to male social partners. To date, only a handful of animal studies have found that social relationships may affect survival. This study extends those findings by examining relationships to both sexes in by far the largest dataset yet examined for any animal. Our results support the idea that social effects on survival are evolutionarily conserved in social mammals.

Study subjects were members of a well-studied population of wild baboons living in the Amboseli ecosystem in southern Kenya [53]. Subjects were females that had survived to reach adulthood, living in eight different social groups over 84 group-years (average years per group = 10.5; range = 2–16 years). Behavioural and demographic data on each group were collected by three experienced observers during 5-h monitoring visits. These visits occurred year round, two to three times per week per group. For 93% of the females in our main dataset (190 of 204), ages were known to within a few days; for the remaining 14 females (born before the onset of behavioural monitoring), birthdates were estimated to within 1 year (n = 6), 2 years (n = 1) or 3 years (n = 7). Death dates were known to be within a few days for females that died before the end of the study period. For females, adulthood was defined by the onset of menarche; males were considered adult when they became higher ranking than all adult females and ranked among the adult males in their social group [54]. We constructed two individual-based, age-specific indices of adult female social connectedness: one to adult females (SCI-F) and the other to adult males (SCI-M). In studies of the adaptive and health significance of social behaviour, affiliative social connectedness has been measured in a variety of ways (e.g. [1,11–13,15,16–19,40]). We chose to use ‘composite’ indices of social connectedness (as opposed to ‘dyadic’ indices (e.g. [11,12,17]) because we were interested in the effects of a female’s overall level of affiliative social behaviour, regardless of the presence or quality of particular social bonds in her life. Our indices were very similar to those used in several prior studies in non-human animals [14,16,53], as well as those used to measure structural social integration in many studies in humans (reviewed in [1]). Specifically, social connectedness was measured for each female relative to all other adult females alive in the population in the same year. Following previous studies [12,14,15,54], these indices used data on grooming behaviour, which maintains and strengthens social bonds in baboons and other primates [55,56]. To measure grooming relationships, we chose to use ad libitum observations of grooming [57,58], which included all observed instances of grooming between group members and was the densest dataset available to measure patterns of female affiliation (see the electronic supplementary material). Our sampling protocol was designed to avoid potential biases in the grooming data that could result from uneven sampling of study subjects. Specifically, the great majority of our ad libitum data were collected during random-order focal animal sampling on adult females and juveniles, which ensured that observers continually moved to new locations within the group and observed all adult females and juveniles on a regular rotating basis. Ad libitum grooming frequencies were significantly correlated with hourly rates of grooming from focal animal sampling (see the electronic supplementary material), indicating a lack of strong or systematic bias in the ad libitum data. Nevertheless, we could not assess whether our analysis choices completely eliminated biases introduced by our sampling protocol; therefore, we also consider possible implications of these choices in the Discussion. From the ad libitum data, we calculated SCI-F and SCI-M for each adult female in each year of her adult life as a composite index of the relative frequency that she groomed and was groomed by adult females or adult males, respectively (see the electronic supplementary material, figure S1). Positive SCI values represent females with relatively high frequencies of grooming for the population in that year; negative values represent females with relatively low frequencies of grooming for that year. Data to replicate our analyses have been uploaded to the Dryad data repository. We modelled survival in adult females using Cox proportional hazards models. We employed time-varying covariates in our models because, in the course of testing predictors of SCI-F, we found that older females generally had lower values of SCI-F, making it inappropriate to use a single, average value of lifetime social connectedness. We ran two different models using the rms package [59,60] in R [61]. The first model, called the ‘main’ model, included 1968 female-years of data on 204 females with 87 censored records (censored records were females who were still alive when our records ended in 2011; average number of years of data per female = 9.64; range = 1–24 years). The main model included imputed values for some predictor variables in 30% of female-years. Missing values were imputed via multiple imputation [62] and weighted predictive mean matching as implemented via the aregImpute function in the rms package in R [59,60] (see the electronic supplementary material for additional information on data imputation methods). We performed the full imputation 50 times to create 50 imputed datasets and fit the main Cox proportional hazards model to each of these 50 datasets. Parameters presented in the main model were averaged over the 50 model fits. The second model, called the ‘complete case’ model, excluded all female-years with missing data. This model included 1376 female-years of data on 194 females, with 124 censored records. The complete case model had more censored records than the main model because one or more predictor variables were missing for some females in the final year(s) of their life, forcing us to truncate their data prior to the year of their death (N = 37 of 124). For both the main and the complete case models, females entered the model at adulthood and left the model at death or censorship. For both models, we included the following predictor variables: (i) the female’s SCI-F in that year, (ii) her SCI-M in that year, (iii) her average dominance rank in that year, (iv) her average group size (the number of adults of both sexes in the group in that year), (v) whether her mother was still alive and present in the group in that year, and (vi) whether she had adult daughters living in the group that year. For each of these predictors, the validity of the proportional hazards assumption was well supported (electronic supplementary material, table S1). There were no differences in the results from the main and complete case models; in the text, we present the results of the main model because of its added statistical power (see the electronic supplementary material for results of the complete case model). Because we found strong effects of SCI-F and SCI-M on female survival, we conduced further analyses to understand which factors predicted individual SCI-F and SCI-M. Based on prior research, we expected that female social connectedness to adult females would be correlated with the availability of adult maternal kin, who often form the strongest social bonds in baboon societies [63–66], as well as age, which is associated with declining availability of non-kin social partners [64]. We further predicted that female social connectedness to adult males would be correlated with female dominance rank, based on evidence that male ‘friends’ may be a limited resource for female baboons [41,50,67]. We modelled SCI-F and SCI-M separately using linear mixed effects models constructed in the lme4 package in R [68]. Female identity was included in the models as a random variable; we also included the following variables for each female in each year of her adult life: (i) age; (ii) average dominance rank; (iii) average group size; (iv) whether her mother was present in the group; (v) number of her adult maternal sisters in the group; (vi) number of her adult daughters in the group; and (vii) her social connectedness to the other sex (i.e. SCI-M in the case of the SCI-F model and vice versa). We present the results of the full models, but also used stepwise elimination and likelihood ratio tests for subsequent model selection.

I’m sorry, but I’m unable to provide recommendations for innovations to improve access to maternal health based on the information you provided. Could you please provide more specific details or context?
AI Innovations Description
The provided description is unrelated to the topic of improving access to maternal health. However, I can provide a general recommendation for developing innovations to improve access to maternal health:

1. Conduct a needs assessment: Identify the specific challenges and barriers that women face in accessing maternal health services, such as distance to healthcare facilities, lack of transportation, cultural beliefs, or financial constraints.

2. Engage stakeholders: Involve key stakeholders, including healthcare providers, community leaders, and women themselves, in the development process. Their insights and perspectives can help shape effective and culturally appropriate solutions.

3. Leverage technology: Explore the use of technology to overcome geographical barriers and improve access to maternal health services. This could include telemedicine, mobile health applications, or remote monitoring devices.

4. Strengthen healthcare infrastructure: Invest in improving healthcare facilities, staffing, and equipment in areas with limited access to maternal health services. This may involve training and deploying more healthcare providers, ensuring the availability of essential medical supplies, and upgrading facilities to provide comprehensive maternal care.

5. Community-based interventions: Implement community-based interventions that address social and cultural factors affecting access to maternal health services. This could involve community education programs, peer support networks, or partnerships with local organizations to provide transportation or financial assistance.

6. Collaborate with local organizations: Partner with local organizations, NGOs, and government agencies to leverage existing resources and expertise. This collaboration can help ensure sustainability and scalability of the innovation.

7. Monitor and evaluate: Continuously monitor and evaluate the impact of the innovation on improving access to maternal health services. Collect data on key indicators, such as maternal mortality rates, antenatal care coverage, and skilled birth attendance, to assess the effectiveness of the intervention and make necessary adjustments.

By following these recommendations, innovative solutions can be developed to improve access to maternal health services and ultimately contribute to better maternal and child health outcomes.
AI Innovations Methodology
The provided text seems to be a description of a scientific study on the impact of social connectedness on the survival of female baboons. It does not provide any information related to innovations for improving access to maternal health or a methodology to simulate the impact of these recommendations.

To generate recommendations for improving access to maternal health, it would be necessary to review existing research, policies, and practices in the field of maternal health. This could involve analyzing data on maternal health outcomes, identifying gaps and challenges in access to care, and exploring potential solutions and innovations that have been proposed or implemented in different contexts.

Once potential recommendations have been identified, a methodology to simulate the impact of these recommendations on improving access to maternal health could be developed. This methodology would involve several steps:

1. Define the objectives: Clearly articulate the specific goals and outcomes that the recommendations aim to achieve. For example, the objectives could include reducing maternal mortality rates, increasing access to prenatal care, improving the quality of maternal health services, or addressing disparities in access and outcomes.

2. Identify relevant indicators: Determine the key indicators that will be used to measure the impact of the recommendations. These indicators could include maternal mortality rates, rates of prenatal care utilization, rates of skilled birth attendance, rates of postnatal care utilization, and other relevant indicators.

3. Collect baseline data: Gather data on the current status of the selected indicators in the target population or region. This will provide a baseline against which the impact of the recommendations can be assessed.

4. Develop a simulation model: Create a model that simulates the impact of the recommendations on the selected indicators. This model should take into account various factors that influence access to maternal health, such as geographical location, socioeconomic status, cultural factors, and health system capacity.

5. Input data and parameters: Input the baseline data and relevant parameters into the simulation model. This may include data on population demographics, health infrastructure, health workforce, financial resources, and other relevant factors.

6. Run simulations: Use the simulation model to run different scenarios that represent the implementation of the recommendations. These scenarios could involve changes in policy, infrastructure, service delivery models, or other relevant factors. The simulations should generate estimates of the impact of each scenario on the selected indicators.

7. Analyze results: Analyze the results of the simulations to assess the potential impact of the recommendations on improving access to maternal health. This could involve comparing the outcomes of different scenarios, identifying the most effective interventions, and estimating the magnitude of the expected improvements.

8. Validate and refine the model: Validate the simulation model by comparing its predictions with real-world data or other validated models. Refine the model based on feedback and further analysis.

9. Communicate findings: Present the findings of the simulation study in a clear and accessible manner. This could involve preparing reports, presentations, or other communication materials to share the results with policymakers, healthcare providers, researchers, and other stakeholders.

It is important to note that the specific methodology for simulating the impact of recommendations on improving access to maternal health may vary depending on the context, available data, and resources. The steps outlined above provide a general framework that can be adapted and customized to suit the specific needs of a given study or project.

Yabelana ngalokhu:
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
WhatsApp
Email