bonobo-female-meat-sharing-2-Victor-Amman

Female bonobos share meat of a red colobus monkey. Credit: Victor Ammann

Female Apes Made Most Identified Kills in Ten-Year Congo Study

In A Nutshell

  • Female bonobos caught duikers, small forest antelope, almost three times as often as males in a 10-year Congo study.
  • Males and females caught monkeys at similar rates, which does not fit the idea that females avoid risky hunts.
  • Neighboring bonobo groups hunted very different prey, and age shaped which females hunted what.
  • Chimpanzee-based models of early human hunting may be leaving out the female side of the story.

Chimpanzee hunts make for dramatic nature footage, with packs of males chasing monkeys through the treetops. Bonobos, chimps’ close cousins, tell a different story. Over roughly a decade of watching wild bonobos in the Democratic Republic of Congo, researchers found that females caught a small forest antelope called the duiker almost three times as often as males did.

Researchers logged 415 successful kills between 2014 and 2023 at a research site called LuiKotale. In the 158 cases where the hunter could be identified, females made 99 of the catches. Tree-dwelling monkeys, riskier to chase than antelope, went to both sexes at nearly equal rates.

A report in Current Biology puts that pattern in a bigger context. Many researchers consider meat-eating a major driver of human evolution, which is why the question of who did the hunting matters. Scientists trying to work out how early humans hunted and shared meat often lean on chimpanzees, where adult males do most of the hunting, as a stand-in. Bonobos, another of humans’ closest living relatives, were thought to hunt on the fly, with individual females going after ground-dwelling prey. The field data from Congo complicate that picture.

Female Bonobo Hunting Outpaced Males Across Ten Years of Fieldwork

Two bonobo communities, called west and east, were followed near Salonga National Park. Both had grown used to people trailing them, which let observers watch hunts up close. Depending on the year, the west group had 14 to 20 adult females and 5 to 9 adult males, while the east group had 8 to 10 females and 4 to 6 males. Observers spent about 2,000 days with each group.

Naming the hunter was the hard part. Thick vegetation, group members spread across the forest, and the speed of a chase often hid the moment of capture. A bonobo got credit only if observers saw the catch, or could tell right afterward which animal held the prey. That standard left a known hunter in fewer than half of all captures. Males made 59 of those.

Bonobo Hunting_ Females Lead the Way
Wild female apes in Congo matched males on monkeys and led on antelope, raising doubts about male-led ape hunting. (Image by StudyFinds)

Female Bonobos Hunting Antelope Outdid Males While Monkey Catches Stayed Even

Prey split almost evenly: antelope made up 42 percent of captures and monkeys 43 percent, with birds, rodents, and other small animals making up the rest. One species, the red colobus monkey, accounted for more than three-quarters of the monkeys taken.

Among chimpanzees, researchers have proposed that females avoid risky hunts and stick to safer, ground-dwelling animals. Bonobo females did not follow that script. In the authors’ words, their results “do not support the risk-aversion hypothesis.”

Why females out-caught males on antelope is an open question. Antelope often survive for a while after capture, and their cries draw other bonobos running, which sparks a scramble for the meat. That may explain why males ended up with fewer of them. The authors also point to bonobo society, where females often work together to push males away from food. Female rank is hard to pin down, though, and was not directly tested. Every monkey and antelope hunt, 351 in all, ended with the meat being shared.

Video of a group of female bonobos eating a red colobus monkey after a successful hunt. Credit: Victor Ammann

Neighboring Bonobo Groups Hunted Different Prey, and Female Age Mattered

Though neighbors, the two groups hunted very differently. West-community bonobos went after antelope roughly twice as often as monkeys, while the east community went after monkeys more than four times as often as antelope. Wetter or drier forest and the number of adult males on hand may play a part, but the evidence for each was too shaky to be sure. In the west, females out-hunted males on every kind of prey. In the east, they led on antelope but caught monkeys slightly less often than males.

Age mattered too. Female hunters averaged about 28 years old, and older females were more likely than males to catch both antelope and monkeys. In the west, females who caught monkeys averaged about 20 years old, compared with about 28 for those who caught antelope. The east showed a smaller gap, too small to rule out chance. Older females tend to rank higher, the authors note, so they may be better at holding onto an antelope once a crowd gathers. Why younger females leaned toward monkeys is murkier.

Male-Led Hunting May Not Be the Original Pattern Among Humans’ Closest Relatives

Researchers write that their results “caution against assuming male-biased hunting represents the ancestral condition.” In plain terms, the ancestors humans share with apes may not have hunted the way chimpanzees do. Two readings fit. A pattern in which both sexes hunt, as in bonobos, may be the older one, with male-dominated hunting arriving later. Or bonobo hunting could be a newer trait that developed as females gained social status. Neither idea was tested directly.

Models of early human hunting built on chimpanzees alone leave out a species where females made most identified kills. If females were making so many of the catches, they may have shaped who got fed, a point the authors say calls for a fresh look at meat sharing. One site cannot settle the question, but male-led hunting no longer looks like a safe default.


Paper Notes

Limitations

Hunters could be identified in only 158 of the 415 recorded kills, so the male-versus-female comparison rests on fewer than half the events. Data came from two communities at a single site, which leaves open whether other bonobo populations behave the same way, and only successful hunts were counted. Observers rarely recorded details such as how many animals joined a chase or what roles they played. Female rank is notoriously hard to measure in bonobos, so the dominance explanation was not directly tested. The small number of identified hunters also made it impossible to rule out individual skill as a driver of the differences. The age pattern for monkey hunting was clear-cut only in the west community, and the links to forest type and adult male numbers carried wide uncertainty. As an observational study, it cannot show cause and effect.

Funding and Disclosures

Funding came from the Max Planck Society, the Centre for Research and Conservation, and the Ouwehand Zoo Foundation. Open access funding was enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The authors declared no competing interests.

Publication Details

“Females shape hunting of vertebrates in wild bonobos” was written by Gottfried Hohmann, Mattia Bessone, Nadia Balduccio, Francesca Decina, Tanguy Deville, Sonya Pashchevskaya, Valeska Soliday, Kathrine Stewart, and Barbara Fruth. The authors are affiliated with the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology, the University of Konstanz, and the Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp’s Centre for Research and Conservation. Correspondence: Gottfried Hohmann ([email protected]) and Barbara Fruth ([email protected]). The report appears in Current Biology, volume 36, pages 1-7, with an issue date of November 16, 2026. It was received April 9, 2026, and accepted September 28, 2026, and is listed as in press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2026.09.082. The article is open access under a CC BY 4.0 license.

About StudyFinds Analysis

Called "brilliant," "fantastic," and "spot on" by scientists and researchers, our acclaimed StudyFinds Analysis articles are created using an exclusive AI-based model with complete human oversight by the StudyFinds Editorial Team. For these articles, we use an unparalleled LLM process across multiple systems to analyze entire journal papers, extract data, and create accurate, accessible content. Our writing and editing team proofreads and polishes each and every article before publishing. With recent studies showing that artificial intelligence can interpret scientific research as well as (or even better) than field experts and specialists, StudyFinds was among the earliest to adopt and test this technology before approving its widespread use on our site. We stand by our practice and continuously update our processes to ensure the very highest level of accuracy. Read our AI Policy (link below) for more information.

Our Editorial Process

StudyFinds publishes digestible, agenda-free, transparent research summaries that are intended to inform the reader as well as stir civil, educated debate. We do not agree nor disagree with any of the studies we post, rather, we encourage our readers to debate the veracity of the findings themselves. All articles published on StudyFinds are vetted by our editors prior to publication and include links back to the source or corresponding journal article, if possible.

Our Editorial Team

Steve Fink

Editor-in-Chief

John Anderer

Associate Editor