Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site we53.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!cuae2!ltuxa!we53!jlr
From: jlr@we53.UUCP (JAN L. RICHARDSON)
Newsgroups: net.bio
Subject: Re: Evolutionary advantages of monogamy
Message-ID: <416@we53.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 5-Mar-86 08:42:31 EST
Article-I.D.: we53.416
Posted: Wed Mar  5 08:42:31 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Mar-86 06:35:19 EST
References: <1334@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Technologies - St. Louis Missouri
Lines: 32

>I've been trying to think of why some species would evolve (or maintain)
>a pattern of monogamous mating. I can think of evolutionary advantages
....
>having evolved and continued. Are there some "standard" explanations
>for this that I just don't know?

I have not been employed in the field for several years now so I have not
kept current with all of the developments, but I do remember some very
promising research being done with primates which indicated that the
survival of the family group was actually one of the primal instincts.
The idea was that some species can survive bettee as a family unit, with
integral support.  This being true in a natural, nondisturbed environment.
This changes as man encroaches as does all of natures elements. Anyway,
since I haven't been able to keep up, I don't know what has become of this
research.  It might be a partial answer to your question however.  Perhaps
someone else has more information.

It's funny.  In all my educational background in environmental biology 
and ecology we discussed the differences between types of paring, but
no one ever offered any reasons for the differences.  A definate void 
in my education.

Jan Richardson
Richardson Consulting
147 Joel Avenue
Union,  MO  63084
314/583-4563

temporary net address:  ihnp4!we53!jlr

DISCLAIMER:   I am a subcontractor for AT&T, not an employee.  Nothing
              in this shoulb be associated in any way with AT&T.