
One and only?: Genetic research has dispelled many of the monogamy myths in the animal kingdom. But some bonds seem to hold up at least as well as human ones seem to.
Image: Wikimedia Commons/Matthias Kabel
More In This Article
-
What a Plant Knows
How does a Venus flytrap know when to snap shut? Can it actually feel an insect’s tiny, spindly legs? And how do cherry blossoms know when to bloom? Can they...
Read More »
Let's face it, most animals get around. Only about 5 percent of mammals are considered to be monogamous. What a biologist means by monogamy is not necessarily what a marriage counselor might assume. In the animal kingdom, what we think of as commitment-type monogamy should really be separated out into at least three types of bonds, explained Diane Witt, who leads the Neural Systems Cluster at the National Science Foundation, in a live chat last week. There is sexual fidelity, social attachment and parental behavior. Research in a number of animal species suggests that differences in neurochemicals and receptors might influence various degrees of these sorts of pairing.
For instance, birds are quite socially monogamous, with some 92 percent of species sticking with one mate for at least a mating season. But that does not mean that some of them are not getting a little extracurricular action. With the advent of genetic testing, scientists have been able to get the inside scoop on flings by testing parents and offspring. So even birds with a reputation of respectability were often caught straying from the nest.
Not all animals, however, have ended up with a scarlet letter from science. See which animals stay true to their true loves and how humans stack up against animal kingdom odds.
View slide show of 12 mostly monogamous animals.




See what we're tweeting about


5 Comments
Add CommentMonogamy may have some disadvantages in matters of natural selection, but it has one big advantage. It reduces the risk of catching a venereal disease or any other disease that can be transferred by sexual intercourse, e.g. some fungus diseases like Microsporum or Geomyces.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe animals that live in monogamous relationships may be adapted to environments where the exposure to such diseases is very high and where monogamy is beneficial.
What about humans, btw.?
Did you know that hyenas are the only living things, along with humans,in which females do have an hymen that is broken in the first intercourse ?. A french author wrote about "The unfatomable ether of the wonderful hymen", and in a radio program, I heard a man stating he separated from his wife after realizing in their first relation that "She wasn't narrow". Lots of phone calls to the radio station followed, asking for the meaning of a woman "being or not being narrow".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismy family has been lifers for generations, love is better that way, you finally made my parents sound smart rather than diluded & odd...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthanks,
a few other species that mate for life are
bald eagles and wolves.
Loving life and practicing monogamy? What? Is it possible to reconcile the two? God I miss polygamy, brings me back to the late 19th century...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you remember the 19th century, I would be very surprised to learn that you are still practicing any kind of -gamy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMonogamy has a better selection score when you live in an environment, where diseases are abundant that get transmitted by sexual intercourse. If you live in such an environment and you love your life, you better stay by your man - or woman, of course.
Actually - there are two types of monogamy: One with strict role delineations between the partners, and one, where they share the burden of growing offspring equally.
If both partners look very different, the species will probably have males and females with different tasks. If they look the same, they will probably share all burdens equally.
What about humans? Men and women look similar, but not identical. It seems that we are somewhere in the middle.