Baboons share food based on the strength of their friendships

Guinea baboons share food in ways that reflect the strength of their relationships. Close partners receive pieces calmly, while distant acquaintances see more snatching. The pattern mirrors how human hunter-gatherers distribute precious food through families and camps.

The findings come from a long-running field project led by researchers at the German Primate Center (DPZ) – Leibniz Institute for Primate Research in Göttingen. The experts analyzed 109 meat-eating events alongside nearly a decade of behavioral data. The study shows that social organization – not just hunger – shapes who gets what and how.

Inside baboon social structure

Guinea baboons live in a nested, multi-level social system. The smallest component is the “unit,” typically one male with one to several associated females and their offspring.

Three to four units form a “party,” often bound by long-term ties among males, frequently supported by kinship. Two to three parties, in turn, form a “gang.”

As one moves up these levels, bonds generally loosen – a structure that provides a natural test of how relationship strength affects resource flow.

Watching food turn social

At the DPZ field station in Simenti, Senegal, observers recorded 320 instances of meat transfers. Most involved males handing off – deliberately or not – to females in their own units or to other males within the same party.

The records reveal a clear gradient: the stronger the tie between two animals, the more likely food moved between them, and the more peaceful the handover appeared. With looser ties, transfers occurred less often and were more contentious, sometimes involving outright theft.

Calm cooperation close to home

Close in – within units – a distinctive pattern emerged. Tolerant transfers – where one animal could take a piece of meat without sparking a fight – were common.

These “passive sharing” events were overwhelmingly concentrated at the unit level. Between different units or across an entire gang, the tone shifted: fewer transfers and more conflict, reflecting the weaker bonds at those broader scales.

“We were able to show that Guinea baboons pass meat along their social bonds,” said William O’Hearn, lead author of the study. “This form of tolerant sharing is reminiscent of the behavior of human hunter-gatherer groups, where meat is first distributed within the family and only then reaches more distant acquaintances or neighbors.”

Modeling baboon generosity

To quantify those relationships, the team combined fine-grained observations with statistical models that estimated bond strength among individuals.

The results were straightforward: as the modeled strength of the relationship with the current “owner” increased, so did the likelihood of receiving a share. In other words, food moved along baboon social lines, not at random.

Crucially, Guinea baboons did not behave like active philanthropists. They rarely offered pieces outright. Instead, sharing was typically “passive.” One animal fed and then left.

Then a closely bonded partner – often a female from the same unit or a male from the same party – took over without trouble. That tolerance, rather than deliberate giving, appears to be the key ingredient enabling resource flow in this species.

Human patterns in baboons

Anthropologists have long argued that food sharing helped fuel the evolution of complex human societies. Hunting is risky and success fluctuates, so pooling across households and camps can smooth the food supply, especially when the prize is calorically rich but rare.

In human groups, those flows are guided by kinship, partnership, and norms – first within households, then outward to neighbors.

Guinea baboons lack our cultural rules, yet they show a comparable architecture: strong ties at the base, where food moves easily, and weaker ties higher up, where transfers grow rarer and more contentious. That convergence suggests that multilayered social structures can channel valuable resources in similar ways across species.

The flip side of tolerance is theft. When baboon bonds were weak – between units within a party or among members of a gang – attempts to take food were more likely to spark disputes.

The behavior maps neatly onto the social scaffold: where trust and familiarity run low, conflict replaces cooperation. This contrast underscores how deeply relationship quality shapes day-to-day economics in animal societies.

Generosity without intention

Because meat usually changed hands without overt gifting, the study highlights the power of proximity and patience over deliberate generosity.

Animals with strong bonds can stay close without provoking aggression, wait out a feeding bout, and step in as the first successor.

In a practical sense, tolerance does the work that norms and agreements do in humans – reducing friction so resources can flow.

A window on social evolution

By tying resource distribution to a species’ social architecture, the research offers a bridge between primate behavior and human social evolution. It suggests that once societies become multi-level, similar pressures and opportunities can produce similar outcomes, regardless of culture.

“This suggests that certain social patterns may have developed independently in humans and non-human primates, but in comparable ways,” said Julia Fischer, the head of the Cognitive Ethology Laboratory at the DPZ.

Meat is rare, valuable, and deeply social. In Guinea baboons, it doesn’t move randomly – it follows the bonds that hold their society together. Closest partners share most and fight least. As relationships thin with distance, cooperation gives way to competition.

The pattern aligns with what we see in human hunter-gatherers, suggesting that the pathways for sharing precious resources may be written into the logic of layered societies themselves.

The full study is published in the journal iScience.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates. 

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–