Humans Are Like Beavers and Meerkats: Monogamy in Humans Is the Exception

Understanding Monogamy in Humans

A team led by Dr. Mark Dyble, an evolutionary anthropologist at the University of Cambridge, set out to examine how monogamy in humans compares to other mammals. Instead of relying on stereotypes, the researchers turned to “hard” genetic data. They focused on the percentage of “full” siblings (those sharing both parents) versus half-siblings (sharing only 1 parent).

According to Dyble, “Species and societies with higher levels of monogamy likely have more siblings sharing both parents. Conversely, those with polygamous or promiscuous mating patterns show higher rates of half-siblings.”

Humans Lead the Elite Monogamy League

After analyzing the data, researchers found that the rate of full siblings in humans stands at 66 percent. This figure places us 7th among 11 species recognized for social monogamy and a preference for long-term pair bonds.

There is an elite league of monogamy where humans feel comfortable, while the vast majority of other mammals approach mate selection in a much more promiscuous way,

– comments Mark Dyble.

The Complete Monogamy Standings

The company we keep is very surprising at first glance. It turns out that, regarding romantic affairs, humans are much closer to meerkats and beavers than to chimpanzees or gorillas. This means that monogamy in humans is far more common than among our closest animal relatives.

In the monogamy “league table,” humans outpace meerkats (59.9 percent full siblings) but trail behind beavers (72.9 percent full siblings). Most primates are polygamous or promiscuous, showing low rates of full siblings—chimpanzees have only 4.1 percent, and mountain gorillas stand at 6.2 percent. The absolute record-holder is the California mouse, which boasts practically 100 percent full siblings:

• California Mouse – 100 percent (Full Siblings)
• African Wild Dog – 85 percent
• Naked Mole-Rat – 79.5 percent
• Emperor Tamarin – 77.6 percent
• Ethiopian Wolf – 76.5 percent
• European Beaver – 72.9 percent
• Human – 66 percent
• White-handed Gibbon – 63.5 percent
• Meerkat – 59.9 percent
• Gray Wolf – 46.2 percent
• Red Fox – 45.2 percent
• Black Rhinoceros – 22.2 percent
• European Badger – 19.6 percent
• African Lion – 18.5 percent
• Crab-eating Macaque – 18.1 percent
• Wildcat – 16.2 percent
• Banded Mongoose – 15.9 percent
• Klipspringer – 14.3 percent
• South American Coati – 12.6 percent
• Spotted Hyena – 12 percent
• Eastern Chipmunk – 9.6 percent
• White-headed Capuchin – 8.5 percent
• Mountain Gorilla – 6.2 percent
• Olive Baboon – 4.8 percent
• Common Chimpanzee – 4.1 percent
• Bottlenose Dolphin – 4.1 percent
• Malbrouck Monkey – 4 percent
• Yellow Baboon – 3.7 percent
• Orca – 3.3 percent
• Antarctic Fur Seal – 2.9 percent
• American Black Bear – 2.6 percent
• Japanese Macaque – 2.3 percent
• Rhesus Macaque – 1.1 percent
• Crested Macaque – 0.8 percent
• Soay Sheep – 0.6 percent

What Sets Humans Apart?

In the monogamy league, most species living alongside humans belong to small, family-based groups. These usually consist of a breeding pair and their offspring. Alternatively, they live in colonies where only 1 female reproduces. Humans, however, live in large social groups where multiple females have children simultaneously.

This represents a key difference between humans and other mammals. We maintain relatively high monogamy while living in large, mixed-gender groups. Meerkats and beavers usually function in small colonies or pairs. A gibbon lives with a single partner in a specific territory. We, by contrast, combine pair-bonding with a vast network of relatives and non-relatives.

Furthermore, the study measures reproductive monogamy rather than sexual behavior. In most mammals, sex and reproduction remain strictly linked. In humans, contraception and culture separate the 2. This means we can maintain a long-term monogamous bond, a series of serial monogamous relationships, or even polygamous arrangements that still “produce” many full siblings.

Are Humans Naturally Monogamous?

The fact that human full-sibling rates overlap with the range observed among socially monogamous mammals reinforces the idea that monogamy is the dominant mating pattern for our species,

– Dr. Dyble notes.

Does this prove humans are naturally monogamous? Based on the Cambridge study, while monogamy in humans is not strict, it dominates as a pattern. Evolution favors this arrangement because it improves the care and survival of offspring.

A Single Lifelong Partner?

Neurobiology shows we have strong predispositions for pair-bonding. However, this does not mean every person has only 1 such bond in a lifetime. The research suggests a pattern of serial monogamy driven by a biological inclination for strong connections, rather than a single, unbreakable “forever” union. Evolution equipped us with the capacity for deep romantic ties rather than a rigid “one partner for life” program.

In summary, monogamy in humans suggests that monogamy—as a dominant pattern for raising children in a pair—is the “default setting” for our species. Yet, variation remains equally natural. We can form multiple relationships, function in polygamous cultures, or exist in non-standard arrangements. Culture, law, and individual choice ultimately decide how our innate tendencies translate into real-world relationships.

Read this article in Polish: Ludzie jak bobry i surykatki. Jesteśmy wyjątkiem w świecie przyrody