Abstract
Our recent paper Lledo-Ferrer et al. (International Journal of Primatology 32: 974–991, 2011) questioned the classic view of territoriality and chemical communication in wild callitrichids, saddleback tamarins (Saguinus fuscicollis). We suggested that rather than defending a territory or resources, chemical communication was more likely to be a way of exchanging reproductive information between groups. Roberts (International Journal of Primatology 33, 2012). challenged this interpretation, considering that the results could more parsimoniously be interpreted as fulfilling a resource defense strategy. This response is intended to clarify some aspects of the debate and to suggest how further research could shed new light on the present polemics.
Highlights
Our recent paper Lledo-Ferrer et al (International Journal of Primatology 32: 974–991, 2011) questioned the classic view of territoriality and chemical communication in wild callitrichids, saddleback tamarins (Saguinus fuscicollis)
In a recent field study with saddleback tamarins, (Saguinus fuscicollis), we suggested a new interpretation of scent-marking and territorial behavior (Lledo-Ferrer et al 2011)
Encounters occur on a regular basis, and scent-marking is not enhanced during these encounters
Summary
Through scent-matching, an intruder is able to evaluate costs and benefits of intrusion, and adapt its behavior (Gosling 1982; Gosling and Roberts 2001). These costs and benefits should be quantified and compared reliably. Our tamarin groups encounter each other on average every 2–3 d, group composition is stable, and so they have ample opportunities for this comparison. Why should they tolerate the costs of meeting at such a high rate?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
