Neotropical Primates - Primate Specialist Group

ISSN 1413-4703NeotropicalPrimatesA Journal of the Neotropical Section of theIUCN/SSC Primate Specialist GroupVolume 15Number 2August 2008EditorsErwin PalaciosLiliana Cortés-OrtizJúlio César Bicca-MarquesEckhard HeymannJessica Lynch AlfaroLiza VeigaNews and Book ReviewsBrenda SolórzanoErnesto Rodríguez-LunaPSG ChairmanRussell A. MittermeierPSG Deputy ChairmanAnthony B. Rylands

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 39EditorialWe are delighted to announce that the first meetings of Neotropical Primates' new editorial team were held at the 22ndCongress of the International Primatological Society in Edinburgh in August 2008. All members of the team were able toattend and Anthony B. Rylands was on hand to offer advice (see photo below). This was a rare opportunity to meet up anddiscuss a range of issues related to the journal, including the role and responsibilities of the Editors and Editorial Board,ways to improve the referee process, revisions to the format, as well as future directions for the publication. A key issue thatemerged during the meetings was, the importance of including information about ongoing field projects, news items andabstracts of completed theses and dissertations, therefore we strongly encourage authors to summit texts on these topics.Neotropical Primates has become an extremely valuable resource over the years. Its broad scope, open publication policy,and accessibility mean that it is uniquely placed to disseminate information about New World Primates.Sadly, habitat destruction and hunting are increasing threats to primates. Together with the unpredictable impacts of globalclimate change, they pose a complex challenge for those concerned with the conservation of primates and the ecosystemsthey inhabit. It is important that we remain optimistic and endeavor to be more creative in our conservation actions.Neotropical Primates aims to contribute to discussions both directly and indirectly linked to primate conservation and thusto foster the preservation of these unique animals.Erwin PalaciosLiliana Cortés-OrtizJúlio César Bicca-MarquesEckhard HeymannJessica Lynch AlfaroLiza VeigaEditorial Team with Anthony B. Rylands. From left: Brenda Solorzano, Erwin Palacios, Liza M. Veiga,Liliana Cortés-Ortiz, Jessica Lynch Alfaro, Eckhard Heymann, and Júlio C. Bicca-Marques. Missing ErnestoRodríguez-Luna.

42were considered as unripe. We distinguished two typesof unripe fruits, early and late, based on the presence of athin brown coat covering the seeds in the late unripe stage.During this study period, the first fruits appeared in thebeginning of June, becoming abundant from the end ofJune through the middle of July, which corresponds to thepeak dry season at this site (Strier, 1991).ResultsA total of 24 records of predation on Mabea fistulifera seedswere observed during July 2003, representing 2.9% ofthe 836 FRs obtained during this month. In all records,unripe seeds were consumed by adult individuals. Northernmuriquis spent on average 4.8±2.9 min (Mean±SD;range 1-9 min; N=5) consuming seeds from Mabea fistuliferatrees. No intact seeds of Mabea fistulifera were foundin examinations of any of the 102 fecal samples collectedduring the same period. Mabea fistulifera fruits are hard,dry, spherical dehiscent cocci, containing an average of3.0±0.28 (N=47) small seeds (seed length=7.7±0.89 mm;seed width=5.4±0.42 mm; wet weight per seed=0.12±0.02g; N=28 seeds). Whole fruits had an average length of17.8±1.49 mm and an average width of 17.0±1.92 mm,and weighed 2.99±0.79 g (N=42 fruits). Fruit volumewas significantly greater in the late stage (38.7±2.15 mm 3 ;range 34.6-41.2 mm 3 ; N=12) than early stage of ripeness(35.1±3.57 mm 3 ; range 29.6-40.2 mm 3 ; N=32; Wilcoxonrank sum test W=79, p

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 43seeds (Charnov, 1976). Northern muriquis may be capableof opening late unripe fruits, but it may not be profitablefor them to do so. In a previous study, Martins (2007)found that the southern muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides,selects unripe seeds of fleshy/protected as well as dry fruitsbased on the availability of these types in her study area.Unfortunately, we do not have systematic measures ofMabea fistulifera seed availability during our study, butnorthern muriquis appeared to consume their unripe seedsduring the period when they were most abundant and alsowhen the majority of fruits were at earlier stages of maturity(from end of June to middle of July). By mid-July, thehusks of the fruits become much harder as the fruits ripen.Thus, there appears to be a fairly narrow window of timeduring which Mabea fistulifera fruits are soft enough fornorthern muriquis to break open and ingest their seeds.Muriqui seed predation could thus be considered as a seasonalphenomenon, similar to that described for Lagothrixlagotricha cana in the Amazon (Peres, 1994).In addition to fruit hardness, other characteristics, suchas nutrient content and palatability, could account for thenorthern muriquis’ selection of early unripe Mabea fistuliferafruits. Indeed, because the muriquis’ are known to consumenectar from the inflorescences of this species betweenlate April and May at this site (Ferrari and Strier, 1992;Mourthé, 2006), they would be familiar with resource, andprimed to exploit it for other items, such as seeds. Thereis evidence that the mid-dry season, when they consumedthese seeds, is a period of food shortage at our study site(Strier, 1991). Mabea fistulifera seeds are very rich in oil(Vieira et al., 1992), which could provide an importantsource of energy when other fruits that are easier to processare scarce. Indeed, the seasonal inclusion of seeds in thediets of other primates is thought to compensate for seasonalfruit shortages (Norconk, 2007). Even small seedscan be valuable sources of protein and lipids, as in the caseof three other Euphorbiaceae species (Maprounea guianensis,Sapium aubletianum and Actinostemon schomburgkii),which are known to have high lipid and protein levels(Norconk and Conklin-Brittain, 2004).may be present in Mabea fistulifera seeds may not be as efficientin deterring a primate that deals on a daily basis withthe detoxification of a great amount of plant secondarycompounds abundant in mature leaves (Kinzey and Norconk,1990) such as northern muriquis do. The impact ofsecondary compounds on herbivores’ diets is very difficultto assess (Janzen, 1978), and analyses of the chemical andnutritional properties of Mabea fistulifera seeds are neededto evaluate how they might interact with fruit hardnessand ripeness to influence the stage at which muriquis consumethem. For instance, black colobus monkeys (Colobussatanas) consume high levels of secondary compounds inseeds, but ignore leaves with similar concentrations of thesechemicals because of the great reward in nutrients they areable to get on seeds (McKey, 1978).Northern muriquis were also seen feeding but not destroyingseeds from other plant species (e.g., Aspidosperma sp.,Cabralea canjerana, Carpotroche brasiliensis, Clusia sp.,Copaifera langsdorffii, Gomidesia crocea, Hymenaea courbaril,Mucuna sp., Nectandra rigida, Ocotea sp., Phyllostemonodaphnegeminiflora, Phyllostemonodaphne sp., Rheediagardneriana, Symphonia globulifera and Virola oleifera) inthe southern part of the Reserve (Strier, 1991; Rímoli,2001). For instance, northern muriquis feed heavily onfruits of Carpotroche brasiliensis when they are availableduring the driest months of the year (June-August), andthe seeds are later found intact in their feces or masticated,indicating that northern muriquis can serve as both seeddispersers and predators (Strier, 1986). Although we wereable to find seeds of other species as small as 2 mm in ourpresent analyses of muriqui fecal samples, no intact seedsof Mabea fistulifera were found, implying that these seedswere chewed up and digested, consistent with seed predationpractices observed in other primates (Gautier-Hionet al., 1993). We guess that these small seeds are beingcompletely destroyed because they are the only reward ofMabea fistulifera dry fruits. However, it is important tokeep in mind that the low abundance of Mabea fistuliferaseeds in northern muriqui diet could reduce the chances offinding them in the fecal samples.Palatability is strongly influenced by the percentage of secondarycompounds stored in plant parts. However, theconcentrations of these toxic metabolites are known tobe lower in the leaves of fast-growing trees (Coley et al.,1985). Mabea fistulifera is considered to be a pioneer species(Olmos and Boulhosa, 2000; Peternelli et al., 2004),and as such, may be similar to other fast-growing treesthat invest less in the production of chemical defenses andtherefore have few, if any, secondary metabolites storedin their seeds. Moreover, Norconk and Conklin-Brittain(2004) found no differences in tannin levels between plantparts eaten and not eaten by Venezuelan white-faced sakis(Pithecia pithecia). Monkeys could accept a trade-off forfoods that are high in antifeedants but also high in nutrients(Kinzey and Norconk, 1993; Norconk and Conklin-Brittain, 2004). Therefore, whatever chemical compoundsSeveral studies have examined the hardness of foodsingested by primates relative to their morphological andbehavioral adaptations (Kinzey and Norconk, 1990, 1993;Peres, 1993; Norconk et al., 1997; Lambert et al., 2004),but few have evaluated fruit hardness relative to the nutritionalcontent and palatability of other foods available atthe times of year during which seeds are predated (Kinzeyand Norconk, 1993; Norconk and Conklin-Brittain,2004). More studies of this type are needed to help usbetter understand the relationship between primate foodchoices and the characteristics of the fruits that they eat.AcknowledgmentsWe thank Fabiano Andrade and Wanderson Silva for theirassistance in the field, Fabiana Couto helped us with fruit

44measurements, and Dr. Ari Marques helped us in pressurecalculation. Dr. Liza Veiga and three anonymous reviewersprovided many valuable comments and constructive criticismson this manuscript. The study was supported by agrant to JPB from the Zoological Society of San Diego/Conservation and Research for Endangered Species. Allanalysis and graphics of this paper were accomplishedunder the free software R 2.7.1 (R Development CoreTeam, 2008).ReferencesBoubli, J. P. 1999. Feeding ecology of black-headed uacaris(Cacajao melanocephalus melanocephalus) in Picoda Neblina National Park, Brazil. Int. J. Primatol. 20:719–749.Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging, the marginal valuetheorem. Theor. Popul. Biol. 9: 129–136.Coley, P. D., Bryant, J. P. and Chapin III, F. S. 1985. Resourceavailability and plant antiherbivore defense. Science230: 895–899.Ferrari, S. F. and Strier, K. B. 1992. Exploitation of Mabeafistulifera nectar by marmosets (Callithrix flaviceps) andmuriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides) in south-east Brazil. J.Trop. Ecol. 8: 225–239.Gautier-Hion, A., Gautier, J.-P. and Maisels, F. 1993. Seeddispersal versus seed predation: an inter-site comparisonof two related African monkeys. Vegetatio 107/108:237–244.Janzen, D. H. 1978. Complications in interpreting thechemical defenses of trees against tropical arboreal planteatingvertebrates. In: The Ecology of Arboreal Folivores,Montgomery, G. G. (eds.), pp.73–84. Smithsonian InstitutionPress, Washington D.C.Julliot, C. 1996. Seed dispersal by red howling monkeys(Alouatta seniculus) in the tropical rain forest of FrenchGuiana. Int. J. Primatol. 17: 239–258.Kinzey, W. G. 1992. Dietary and dental adaptations in thePitheciinae. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 88: 499–514.Kinzey, W. G. and Norconk, M. A. 1990. Hardness as abasis of fruit choice in two sympatric primates. Am. J.Phys. Anthropol. 81: 5–15.Kinzey, W. G. and Norconk, M. A. 1993. Physical andChemical Properties of Fruit and Seeds Eaten by Pitheciaand Chiropotes in Surinam and Venezuela. Int. J. Primatol.14: 207–227.Lambert, J. E., Chapman, C. A., Wrangham, R. W. andConklin-Brittain, N. L. 2004. Hardness of cercopithecinesfoods: implications for the critical function ofenamel thickness in exploiting fallback foods. Am. J.Phys. Anthropol. 125: 363–368.Lucas, P. W., Turner, I. M., Dominy, N. J. and Yamashita,N. 2000. Mechanical Defences to Herbivory. Ann. Bot.86: 913–920.Martins, M. M. 2006. Comparative Seed Dispersal Effectivenessof Sympatric Alouatta guariba and Brachytelesarachnoides in Southeastern Brazil. Biotropica 38: 57–63.Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Martins, M. M. 2007. Fruit diet of Alouatta guariba andBrachyteles arachnoides in Southeastern Brazil: comparisonof fruit type, color, and seed size. Primates 49: 1–8.McKey, D. 1978. Soils, vegetation, and seed-eating byblack colobus monkeys. In: The ecology of arboreal folivores,Montgomery, G. G. (eds.), pp.423–438. SmithsonianInstitution Press, Washington D.C.Milton, K. 1993. Diet and primate evolution. Sci. Am.269: 86–93.Miranda, G. H. B. and de Faria, D. S. 2001. Ecological aspectsof black-pincelled marmoset (Callithrix penicillata)in the cerradão and dense cerrado of the brazilian centralplateau. Braz. J. Biol. 61: 397–404.Mourthé, I. M. C. 2006. A ecologia do forrageamento domuriqui-do-norte (Brachyteles hypoxanthus Kuhl, 1820).MSc. thesis, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, BeloHorizonte.Norconk, M. A. 2007. Sakis, uakaris, and titi monkeys -Behavioral diversity in a radiation of primate seed predators.In: Primates in Perspective, Campbell, C. J., Fuentes,A., MacKinnon, K., Panger, M. and Bearder, S. (eds.),pp.123–138. Oxford University Press, New York.Norconk, M. A. and Conklin-Brittain, N. L. 2004. Variationon Frugivory: The Diet of Venezuelan White-FacedSakis. Int. J. Primatol. 25: 1–26.Norconk, M. A., Wertis, C. and Kinzey, W. G. 1997. Seedpredation by monkeys and macaws in eastern Venezuela:preliminary findings. Primates 38: 177–184.Norconk, M. A., Grafton, B. W. and Conklin-Brittain, N.L. 1998. Seed dispersal by neotropical seed predators.Am. J. Primatol. 45: 103–126.Olmos, F. and Boulhosa, L. P. 2000. A meeting of opportunists:birds and other visitors to Mabea fistulifera (Euphorbiaceae)inflorescences. Ararajuba 8: 93–98.Oppenheimer, J. R. 1982. Cebus capucinus: ámbito doméstico,dinámica de poblacíon y relaciones interespecíficas.In: Ecología de un bosque tropical, Leigh Jr., E. G., Pand,A. S. and Windsor, D. M. (eds.), pp.337–356. SmithsonianInstitution, Balboa.Passos, F. C. and Kim, A. C. 1999. Nectar feeding onMabea fistulifera Mart. (Euphorbiaceae) by black liontamarins, Leontopithecus chrysopygus Mikan, 1823 (Callitrichidae),during the dry season in southeastern Brazil.Mammalia 63: 519–521.Peetz, A. 2001. Ecology and social organization of thebearded saki Chiropotes satanas chiropotes (Primates: Pitheciinae)in Venezuela. Ecotrop. Monogr. 1: 1–170.Peres, C. A. 1991. Seed predation of Cariniana micrantha(Lecithidaceae) by brown capuchin monkeys in centralAmazônia. Biotropica 23: 262–270.Peres, C. A. 1993. Notes on the ecology of buffy saki monkeys(Pithecia albicans, Gray 1860): a canopy seed-predator.Am. J. Primatol. 31: 129–140.Peres, C. A. 1994. Diet and Feeding Ecology of GrayWoolly Monkeys (Lagothrix lagotricha cana) in CentralAmazonia: Comparisons with Other Atelines. Int. J. Primatol.15: 333–372.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 45Peternelli, E. F. O., Della-Lucia, T. M. C. and Martins, S.V. 2004. Espécies de formigas que interagem com as sementesde Mabea fistulifera Mart. (Euphorbiaceae). Rev.Árvore 28: 733–738.R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A language and environmentfor statistical computing. 2.7.1. R Foundationfor Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Rímoli, J. 2001. Ecologia de macacos-prego (Cebus apellanigritus, Goldfuss, 1809) na Estação Biológica de Caratinga(MG): implicações para a conservação de fragmentosde Mata Atlântica. Doctoral Thesis, Universidade Federaldo Pará, Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi, Empresa Brasileirade Pesquisa Agropecuária (EMBRAPA), Belém.Stevenson, P. R. 2000. Seed dispersal by woolly monkeys(Lagothrix lagotricha) at Tinigua National Park, Colombia:dispersal distance, germination rates, and dispersalquantity. Am. J. Primatol. 50: 275–289.Strier, K. B. 1986. The behavior and ecology of the woollyspider monkey, or muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides E.Geoffroy 1806). Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Universityof Harvard, Cambridge.Strier, K. B. 1989. Effects of patch size on feeding associationsin muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides). Folia Primatol.52: 70–77.Strier, K. B. 1991. Diet in one group of woolly spider monkeys,or muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides). Am. J. Primatol.23: 113–126.Strier, K. B. and Boubli, J. P. 2006. A history of long-termresearch and conservation of northern muriquis (Brachyteleshypoxanthus) at the Estação Biológica de Caratinga/RPPN-FMA. Primate Conserv. 20: 53–63.Torres de Assumpção, C. 1981. Cebus apella and Brachytelesarachnoides (Cebidae) as potential pollinators of Mabeafistulifera (Euphorbiaceae). J. Mammal. 62: 386–388.van Roosmalen, M. G. M., Mittermeier, R. A. and Fleagle,J. G. 1988. Diet of the northern bearded saki (Chiropotessatanas chiropotes): A Neotropical seed predator. Am. J.Primatol. 14: 11–35.Vieira, E. M. and Izar, P. 1999. Interactions between aroidsand arboreal mammals in the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest.Plant Ecol. 145: 75–82.Vieira, M. F. and Carvalho-Okano, R. M. 1996. Pollinationbiology of Mabea fistulifera (Euphorbiaceae) insoutheastern Brazil. Biotropica 28: 61–68.Vieira, M. F., Mattos, G. T. and Carvalho-Okano, R. M.1992. Mabea fistulifera (Euphorbiaceae) na alimentaçãode aves na região de Viçosa, Minas Gerais, Brasil. IheringiaSér. Zool. 73: 65–68.

46Short ArticlesHa b i t a t Ch a r a c t e r i z a t i o n a n d Po p u l a t i o nDe n s i t y o f Br o w n Sp i d e r Mo n k e y s (At e l e sh y b r i d u s) in Ma g d a l e n a Valley, Co l o m b i aIntroductionAna María AldanaMarta BeltránJohanna Torres-NeiraPablo R. StevensonThe spider monkey Ateles hybridus, one of the most threatenedprimate species in the Neotropics is restricted toColombia and Venezuela (Defler, 2004). There are twosub-species present in Colombia: A. hybridus hybridus andA. hybridus brunneus (Froehlich et al., 1991 in Defler,2004). The geographical range of the species includes thenorthwest region of the country, along the Magdalena Riverfrom the southern region of La Guajira to the northeast ofthe department of Boyacá (Defler, 2004). Populations ofAteles hybridus still exist in several Colombian departments(Magdalena, Cesár, Norte de Santander, Arauca, Santander,Bolívar, Antioquia and Caldas). Due to its limited distributionrange, high hunting pressure, low birth rates andthe accelerated transformation of its habitat, the species isnow considered Critically Endangered (CR A3cd) and facesthe highest risk of extinction in Colombia (Pinzón, 1998;IUCN, 2008; Defler and Rodriguez, 2003). Few conservationactions have focused on A. hybridus subspecies. In the1970’s, there was an initiative to create a protected area atthe Serranía San Lucas, where A. hybridus brunneus occurs,but the plan has not been realized (Defler, 2004).Studies and conservation programs for Ateles hybridus inColombia are scarce (Defler, 2004). There are two publishedstudies that include general ecological informationon the populations in the state of Bolivar (Bernstein et al.,1976; Green, 1978). Additionally, there are reports of thespecies from Venezuela (Mondolfi and Eisenberg, 1979in Defler, 2004). However, there is much less informationavailable for A. hybridus than for other spider monkeyspecies (Defler, 2004). The main aims of the presentstudy were to estimate the population density of brownspider monkeys (Ateles hybridus hybridus) at El Paujil BirdReserve, Magdalena Valley (Colombia) and to comparethe abundance of the monkeys across forests with differentcharacteristics in the area. According to Stevenson (2001)the abundance of primate communities inside protectedNeotropical forests is positively related to fruit production.For this reason we predicted higher population densitiesfor forests with abundant fruit production. In addition,we examined the effect of different levels of logging andhunting pressure, which are known to impact the populationdensity of large Neotropical primates (Peres andNeotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Palacios, 2007). Other projects within the study zone arebeing developed, focusing on the behavioral and ecologicalaspects of the species (A. Link pers. comm.), as well asconservation actions and educational campaigns.MethodsThe research was focused on the A. hybridus hybridus populationsexisting at El Paujil Bird Reserve (owned by FundaciónProAves) located at the Serranía de Las Quinchasin Santander and Boyacá departments (74° 11’ W, 5° 56’N: 200 – 1700 m a.s.l.). The nearest weather station islocated in the municipality of Otanche (74° 11´ W, 5°40´ N: 1070 m a.s.l.), where the median temperature is27.8°C. Precipitation is bimodal showing peaks in April-May and September-November; the total annual precipitationis 2,070 mm. Relative humidity ranges from 85% to89% (Balcázar-Vargas et al., 2000). Annual rainfall during2007 was 3,285 mm (A. Link, pers. comm.)Forest characterizationFour different forest types were studied: forest with a moderatelevel of selective logging (logged forest), forest onflood plains, young secondary forest (secondary forest),and forest with less logging pressure (undisturbed forest).Three of these forest types were present inside the reserve:logged forest, forest on flood plains, and secondary forest.Undisturbed forest was not found inside the reserve, butwas studied on the property of Mr. Norberto Vargas, 8km away from the reserve. The logged forest had beenexploited for wood in the past, contrary to the undisturbedforest, which had been logged for fewer species and to alesser extent. The flood plains were not very extensive,existing only at the bank of the Ermitaño River (< 50 mwide), and flooding occurred only for a few days during therainy seasons; for this reason we did not establish vegetationplots in this forest type. To determine forest composition,we completed five 1-ha vegetation plots, taking intoaccount the proportional area of each forest type found. Inevery hectare we marked and identified all trees and lianaswith DBH (Diameter at Breast Height) greater or equal to5 cm, following the methodology used in Stevenson et al.(2004). The identification of each plant was made withthe aid of binoculars. In the cases where identificationwas not possible, we collected botanical samples for lateridentification. The vouchers were placed at the Universidadde Los Andes Herbarium (ANDES) and the NationalHerbarium (COL). For each 1-ha plot we calculated speciesrichness, number of species per stem and the Fisher’sdiversity index.Resource availabilityFollowing the methodology proposed by Stevenson (2004),we carried out biweekly phenological transects to estimatefruit production of endozoochorous species. Transectswere placed according to the proportion of each forest typeinside the reserve. The distances covered for each foresttype were: 8.9 km for logged forests, 1 km for secondary

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 47forests and 0.8 km for flood plains. We estimated the cropas the total number of fruits produced by each tree presentalong the transects. To decrease the variance resulting fromvisual estimates made by different observers, we quantifiedfruit crop as the mean value of log-scale categories (i.e.1-10, 10-100, 100-1000, and so on: Janson and Chapman,1999). To obtain the production in terms of biomass foreach individual, we estimated the average weight of eachspecies, drying and weighing a minimum of 5 fruits. Thetotal production was estimated as the total production ofall individuals in an area determined from the length andeffective width of the transects, which depends on the sizeof the trees (Stevenson, 2004). The undisturbed forestwas not included because is located far from El Paujil BirdReserve. However, in order to make comparisons withinforests, we calculated the basal area of the endozoochorousspecies for all plots, using only individuals with DBHgreater than 10 cm. In general, the basal area of fruitingtrees is positively correlated with fruit production (Chapmanet al., 1994; Stevenson et al., 1998).Population density of Ateles hybridus and other primatesWe used linear transects to estimate the population densityof all diurnal primates in each forest type. We collectedinformation once a month, recording the species, numberof individuals, and perpendicular distance to the transect.The length of the transects was 6.0 km for the undisturbedforest, 9.9 km for the logged forest, 2.1 km for the floodplains and 1.1 km for the secondary forest. Data were analyzedfor each species using the King estimator (Leopold1933):d = n / 2LaWhere n is the number of individuals observed on eachtransect, L is the length of the transect, and a is the averageperpendicular distance of the individuals to the trail.To determine differences in A. hybridus density betweenforests we performed a Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric testusing Statistix 8.0.ResultsForest type characterizationThe diversity indexes calculated for each vegetation plot areshown in Table 1. We observed that the diversity indexescalculated for undisturbed forest were very similar toindexes calculated for the logged forest, while the diversityindexes for the secondary forest were notably lower thanfor the other forests.Resource availabilityWe found relatively low production for the flood plains (38kg/ha ± 2.3SD) and secondary forest (286 kg/ha ± 12.3SD), while the logged forests showed higher production(501 kg/ha ± 9.4SD). The production in the flood plainswas relatively constant through the sampling period, showingvariation between the biweekly periods every month(Fig. 1a). Fruit production in the secondary forest showeda peak in April caused by the fructification of a single individualof Inga alba, a non-characteristic species of this foresttype (Fig. 1b). For the logged forest, production showed afructification peak during April-June, which matches withthe first rainy season at the study site (Fig. 1c). We foundsignificant differences of resource availability among foresttypes according to the disturbance level. The comparisonbased on the basal area of endozoochorous species (Table1) suggests that fruit productivity should be higher in theundisturbed forest than in the logged forest, because itholds a higher basal area of endozoochorous species.Population density of Ateles hybridus and other primatesWe did not observe Ateles hybridus in secondary forest orin flood plains during the study (Table 2). In contrast, wefound a high density of spider monkeys in the undisturbedand logged forests. Density was similar between these twotypes of forests (n= 24, F= 0.08, p= 0.77). A similar situationwas found for Alouatta seniculus; the highest density ofhowlers were in the logged forest, and they were also presentin the undisturbed forest, but not in the other forests.On the other hand, the highest density of Cebus albifronswas in the secondary forest, where there no other primatespecies were observed.DiscussionWe found differences among forest types in diversity, fruitproduction and basal area of endozoochorous species,which are associated with structural and floristic composition(Aldana et al. in prep.). According to our predictions,the forest types with high fruit production showedthe highest population densities of Ateles hybridus. How-Table 1. Diversity indices and basal area of endozoochorous plant species from each 1-ha vegetation plot in 3 different forest types at thestudy area (values in parenthesis correspond to plants > or = 10 cm DBH).Forest type No. Species No. Individuals Spp/Stem Fisher´s AlphaBasal AreaEndozoochorous (m 2 )Secondary 45 (20) 471 (83) 0.096 (0.241) 12.3 (8.4) 1.1LoggedUndisturbed225 (148) 1070 (499) 0.210 (0.297) 86.8 (71.3) 21.0194 (141) 1000 (544) 0.194 (0.259) 71.8 (61.8) 19.7243 (169) 1048 (527) 0.232 (0.321) 99.2 (86.1) 30.7213 (155) 924 (446) 0.231 (0.348) 86.9 (84.3) 36.3

48Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Figure 1. Monthly production (kg/ha) of endozoochorous fruits within different forest typesfound at El Paujíl Bird Reserve, for the period of time sampled: February 2006 – January 2007.a) Production in the secondary forest. b) Production in the flood plains. c) Production in thelogged forest.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 49Table 2. Density of A. hybridus and other diurnal primate speciesin different forest types at El Paujíl Bird Reserve and nearbyforests. n/a = non/applicable in the cases where the observationswere zero for all months and the standard deviation could notbe calculated.Forest type Species Ind/km 2 Stand. Dev.Ateles hybridus 29 25Undisturbed Alouatta seniculus 3 9Cebus albifrons 34 65Ateles hybridus 38 43Logged Alouatta seniculus 10 11Cebus albifrons 83 114Ateles hybridus 0 n/aSecondary Alouatta seniculus 0 n/aCebus albifrons 136 278Ateles hybridus 0 n/aFlood plains Alouatta seniculus 0 n/aCebus albifrons 7 23ever, there was little difference between density estimates inthe logged and undisturbed forest. This unexpected resultmay be caused by several factors. It is possible that naturalresources exploitation, in particular hunting pressure,could have had a high impact. The logged forest is locatedinside El Paujil reserve and currently provides protectionto the primates and their habitat. In contrast, the undisturbedforest is outside the reserve, where human activitiesare not controlled and, besides the difficulty to accessthe area, there is no particular protection for the primates.Occasionally, during our fieldwork, we detected huntingsites in the undisturbed forest; hunting may reduce thepopulation density, as well as the probability of detectionand the foraging preference in the zone. Another possibleexplanation is that the logged forest is fragmented,with reduced forest area available, so the high density inthe reserve may be explained by the effect of populationconcentration. Although it is difficult for these primatesto move between fragments, there are some observations ofindividuals crossing between two fragments using the highesttrees above roads (A. Link, pers. comm.). Furthermore,the group found on this fragment has approximately 24individuals with 4 females carrying infants (A. Link, pers.com.); this indicates that the population contains a highproportion of young individuals, characteristic of growingpopulations, and suggests that the conditions in whichthese primates are found are adequate to sustain the populationover the short term. In a preliminary evaluation ofthe Ateles hybridus diet at El Paujil, Diaz-Cubillos (2007)found that the group uses the fragment of logged forest,preferring areas with high canopy and high plant diversity.This explains why we did not find these primates inside thesecondary forest or the flood plains, since these areas havelower canopy and are not very productive or diverse.Conclusions and recommendationsEven though the undisturbed forest offers a higher quantityand diversity of endozoochorous plant species, theAteles hybridus groups of the study area at the Serranía deLas Quinchas have similarly high population densities inundisturbed forests and logged forests, because the later areprotected from hunting activities. In areas with past totaldeforestation, such as the secondary forests, we did notfind A. hybridus groups. This suggests that, in contrast toselective logging, clear-cutting forests has long term negativeconsequences for this species. This study indicates thatlogged forest fragments in El Paujil Bird Reserve are still inadequate condition to carry healthy populations of primatespecies such as A. hybridus, A. seniculus, and C. albifrons.Accordingly, the results of this study suggest that a populationof A. hybridus requires relative mature forest with highcanopy levels. We recommend the expansion of the protectedareas where the species can still be found in order todecrease fragmentation, increase connectivity within fragments,and assure a minimum area where the A. hybriduspopulations could have enough space to sustain healthypopulations. We also recommend continued improvementand implementation of educational activities withchildren, and the development of activities with adults toraise awareness at all levels in the local communities. Aimsshould include the reduction of hunting activities outsideof protected areas to guarantee the conservation of the speciesin the region.AcknowledgmentsThis research was possible thanks to the grants from PrimateConservation Inc. and Margot Marsh BiodiversityFoundation, the financial and logistical support fromWoolly Monkey Foundation, Universidad de Los Andes,Fundación ProAves Colombia, and Fundación Shambala.We would like to thank Brent White for all his support andTomas Defler for his interest in the conservation of Ateleshybridus and helpful comments on the project proposal.Special thanks to Elkin Luis Rodriguez for the data oncensus from the undisturbed forests and Oscar Baena forhis help in gathering some phenological data at El Paujil.Ana María Aldana, Marta Beltrán, Johanna Torres-Neira and Pablo R. Stevenson, Centro de InvestigacionesEcológicas La Macarena (CIEM), Departamento deCiencias Biológicas, Universidad de Los Andes. Cr. 1 No.18a-10, Bogotá D. C., Colombia.ReferencesBalcázar-Vargas, M. P., Rangel-Churio, O. J. and Linares-C.,E. L. 2000. Diversidad florística de la Serraníade Las Quinchas, Magdalena Medio, Colombia. Caldasia22(2): 191–224.

50Berstein, I. S., Balcaen, P., Dresdale, L., Gouzoules, H., Kavanagh,M., Patterson, T. and Newman-Warner, P. 1976.Differential effects of forest degradation on primate populations.Primates 17: 401–411.Chapman, C. A., Wrangham, R. and Chapman, L. J.1994. Indexes of habitat-wide fruit abundance in tropicalforests. Biotropica 26: 160–171.Defler, T. R. 2004. Primates of Colombia. Conservation InternationalTropical Field Guide Series. Bogotá: ConservaciónInternacional.Defler, T. R. and Rodríguez, J. V. 2003. Ateles hybridusssp. hybridus. In: 2003 IUCN Red List of ThreatenedSpecies.Díaz Cubillos, L. D. 2007. Caracterización de la dieta deun grupo de choibos Ateles hybridus hybridus (Atelidaeprimate)y evaluación de la diversidad florística de unfragmento de bosque en la Serranía de las Quinchas(Boyacá - Colombia). Undergraduate Thesis.Universidaddel Tolima, Ibagué, Colombia.Green, K. M. 1978. Primate censusing in northern Colombia:A comparison of two techniques. Primates 19:537–550.IUCN, 2008. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/39961.Janson, CH., and Chapman, C. A. 1999. Resources as determinantsof primate community structure. In: PrimateCommunities, Fleagle, J., Janson, C. and Reed, K. (eds.),pp. 237–267. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ.Press.Leopold, A. 1933. Game management. New York: CharlesScribner´s Sons.Peres, C. A. and Palacios, E. 2007. Basin-wide effects ofgame harvest on vertebrate population densities in Amazonianforests: implications for animal-mediated seeddispersal. Biotropica 39 (3): 304–315.Pinzón, O. Y. 1998. Manejo Silvicultural de vivero, plantacióny bosque natural en predios de La ReforestadotaBosques del Futuro S.A. ubicados en los municipios dePuerto Boyacá y Cimitarra (Santander). UndergraduateThesis. Universidad Distrital de Colombia. Bogotá,Colombia.Stevenson, P. R., Quiñones, M. J. and Ahumada, J. A.1998. Effects of fruit patch availability on feeding subgroupsize and spacing patterns in four primate species,at Tinigua National Park, Colombia. Int. J. Primatol.19(2): 313–324.Stevenson, P. R. 2001. The relationship between fruit productionand primate abundance in Neotropical communities.Biol. J. Linnean. Soc. 72: 161–178.Stevenson, P. R. 2004. Patrones fenológicos de vegetaciónleñosa en el Parque Tinigua, Colombia: comparacionesmetodológicas con énfasis en la producción de frutos.Caldasia 26(1): 125–150.Stevenson, P. R. and Quiñones, M. J. 2004. Samplingmethods used to quantify activity patterns and diet: Acomparative example using woolly monkeys (Lagothrixlagothricha). Field Studies of Fauna and Flora La Macarena,Colombia 14: 21–28.Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Pr i m a t a s d a r p p n Ga r g a ú, Pa r a í b a, Br a s i lIntroduçãoMarcos de Souza FialhoGregório Fernandes GonçalvesA comunidade de primatas da Floresta Atlântica, umhotspot para a conservação biológica (Myers et al., 2000), écomposta por pelo menos 21 táxons e, em certas regiões, atéseis espécies podem conviver de forma simpátrica. Contudo,este bioma já perdeu mais de 93% de sua cobertura florestaloriginal (Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica e INPE, 2002).Na área compreendida pela Zona da Mata dos estados deAlagoas, Pernambuco, Paraíba e Rio Grande do Norte, abiorregião Pernambucana (Galindo-Leal e Câmara, 2005)ou Centro de Endemismo Pernambuco (Silva e Casteleti,2005), os remanescentes florestais não chegam a 5% de suaextensão original, pulverizados em uma matriz de canaviais(Coimbra-Filho e Câmara, 1996; Silva e Casteleti, 2005).Nesta paisagem altamente fragmentada do Centro deEndemismo Pernambuco são encontradas três espéciesde primatas, o sagui-de-tufos-brancos Callithrix jacchus(Linnaeus, 1758), o guariba-de-mãos-ruivas Alouattabelzebul (Linnaeus, 1766) e o macaco-prego-galego Cebusflavius (Schreber, 1774). Callithrix jacchus é uma espécierelativamente comum, ocorrendo também na região daCaatinga. Apesar de A. belzebul apresentar uma populaçãodisjunta na Amazônia oriental em razoável estado deconservação, a situação de suas populações remanescentesna Floresta Atlântica nordestina é crítica (Oliveira e Oliveira,1993). Cebus flavius foi redescoberto em 2006 comotáxon válido (Oliveira e Langguth, 2006). Segundo estesautores, a espécie ocorreria na Floresta Atlântica nordestinaao norte do rio São Francisco. Estudos em andamentoapontam que as populações atuais de C. flavius na naturezanão ultrapassam duas dezenas (Ferreira et al., 2007), o quesugere uma situação de altíssima vulnerabilidade. A espéciejá é listada como Criticamente Ameaçada pela IUCN(2008).O processo de fragmentação florestal pode afetar aviabilidade de populações selvagens de diversos modos,tais como o incremento da endogamia e a consequentesusceptibilidade a doenças (Frankham et al., 2002). Porsua vez, os primatas podem responder à fragmentaçãoalterando seu padrão de atividades, sua dieta e sua área deuso entre outros (Marsh, 2003). Populações remanescentesde primatas mais generalistas, como algumas espécies deAlouatta, Cebus e Callithrix (Crockett, 1998; Chiarello,2003), são capazes de suportar o efeito de borda e sedeslocar e/ou se alimentar de recursos do entorno dosfragmentos (pastagens e plantios, por exemplo). Assim,estas populações têm maiores probabilidades de sobreviverao processo de fragmentação e isolamento e podemdispersar e colonizar outros fragmentos. Esta flexibilidadeadaptativa, no entanto, não representa uma garantia de

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 51sobrevivência (Marsh, 2003). Perturbações antrópicas,como a caça e o corte seletivo, e fatores estocásticos podemdiminuir a probabilidade de sobrevivência das populações(Cowlishaw e Dunbar, 2000; Chiarello, 2003; Vieira etal., 2003). Neste estudo são apresentadas estimativas deabundância para as três espécies de primatas ocorrentes emum dos maiores fragmentos florestais da Floresta Atlânticaparaibana.MétodosÁrea de estudoO estudo foi realizado em um fragmento de Floresta EstacionalSemidecidual no município de Santa Rita, Paraíba, aReserva Particular do Patrimônio Natural - RPPN Gargaú(34°57’25”O, 7°00’44”S). A RPPN, também conhecidacomo Mata Santana, é de propriedade da JapunguAgroindustrial S/A. O fragmento encontra-se incluso naReserva da Biosfera da Mata Atlântica e nas Áreas Prioritáriaspara Conservação da Biodiversidade, na categoria“Extrema Importância Biológica” (Mata Santa Rita/Sapé). Ao mesmo tempo, situa-se em área de Alta PressãoAntrópica, de acordo com a “Avaliação e Ações Prioritáriaspara a Conservação da Biodiversidade da Mata Atlânticae Campos Sulinos” (MMA, 2000). Praticamente ao níveldo mar (

523.8 indivíduos/10 km e uma densidade estimada em 0.02grupos/ha (Hazard/Cosine). A maioria dos avistamentosde C. flavius (85%) ocorreu em sítios com florestamadura. Todavia, grupos foram avistados no entorno dafloresta, forrageando em plantações de cana–de-açúcar.A multiplicação da densidade de grupos (±IC) pela áreado fragmento (9 km 2 ) e pelo tamanho médio dos gruposfornece uma estimativa populacional grosseira de 530 (340– 831) indivíduos de C. jacchus e 131 (66 – 289) indivíduosde C. flavius para a RPPN Gargaú. Alouatta belzebul foiavistado apenas duas vezes, sendo um grupo com quatroindivíduos em local com floresta madura e outro com oitoindivíduos em floresta regenerante. Em outras seis ocasiõesforam ouvidas vocalizações. Outros mamíferos observadosno fragmento incluem Dasypus novemcinctus, Bradypusvariegatus, Cerdocyon thous, Procyon cancrivorus, Sciurusaestuans, Coendou prehensilis, Hydrochaeris hydrochaeris eDasyprocta prymnolopha. Euphractus sexcinctus, Cabassousunicinctus, Cyclopes didactylus, Tamandua tetradactyla eNasua nasua tiveram sua presença relatada por trabalhadoresou moradores do entorno, mas não foram avistados duranteeste estudo.DiscussãoDas três espécies de primatas presentes, apenas A. belzebulapresentou um valor de abundância baixo quando comparadoaos obtidos em fragmentos de área similar ao longo daFloresta Atlântica (Cullen et al., 2000; Buss, 2001; São Bernardo,2004; Gaspar, 2005). A baixa taxa de encontro e apequena frequência de vocalizações de A. belzebul sugeremque sua população remanescente na área seja composta porapenas alguns indivíduos. A abundância de C. jacchus naRPPN Gargaú é alta quando comparada com as densidadesou taxas de encontro observadas para a espécie na Caatinga(Moura, 2007) e para Callithrix spp. na Floresta Atlântica(C. aurita: São Bernardo e Galetti, 2004; Martins, 2005;C. geoffroyi: Chiarello, 2000), mas se assemelha ao encontradopor Mendes Pontes et al. (2005) na Floresta Atlânticade Pernambuco. Estudos têm sugerido que espécies maisgomívoras, como C. jacchus e C. penicillata, apresentamáreas de vida pequenas quando comparadas com espéciesmais frugívoras, como C. kuhli e C. aurita (Muskin, 1984;Stevenson e Rylands, 1988; Faria, 1989; Castro, 2003), oque explicaria estas diferenças de estimativa populacional.Os resultados obtidos para C. flavius na RPPN Gargaú seassemelham aos observados para Cebus spp. na FlorestaAtlântica (Pinto et al., 1993, Chiarello, 2000; Cullen et al.Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 20082000; González-Solís et al., 2001; São Bernardo e Galetti,2004; Martins, 2005). Considerando a raridade de C. flaviusna Paraíba e o fato do sítio de estudo ser um dos maioresremanescentes de Floresta Atlântica no estado (Ferreiraet al., 2007), é possível que esta seja uma das maiores populaçõesde C. flavius em toda sua área de distribuição. Contudo,esta estimativa populacional é muito inferior ao queseria esperado para uma população mínima viável com altaprobabilidade de sobrevivência a longo prazo (Franklin,1980; Shaffer, 1981). Estes resultados confirmam a necessidadeurgente de ações de manejo em nível populacional ede paisagem para garantir a conservação desta espécie criticamenteameaçada.AgradecimentosEste estudo teve o apoio do CNPq e da Usina JapunguAgroindustrial S/A nas pessoas de Roberto M. da Silva eDante Guimarães, e a colaboração de Plautino Laroque,Mônica Montenegro, Diana Levacov, Marcelo Xavier F o eThiago Silva.Marcos de Souza Fialho, Centro Nacional de Pesquisa eConservação de Primatas Brasileiros - CPB/ICMBio, PçaAntenor Navarro, 5, Varadouro, João Pessoa, PB, e GregórioFernandes Gonçalves, Bolsista PIBIC, estudante degraduação em Biologia/UFPB.ReferênciasBuckland, S. T., Anderson, D. R., Burnham, K. P., Laake,J. L., Borchers, D. L. e Thomas, L. 2001. Introductionto Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of BiologicalPopulations. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Buss, G. 2001. Estudo da densidade populacional dobugio-ruivo Alouatta guariba clamitans (Cabrera, 1940)(Primates, Atelidae) nas formações florestais do morrodo Campista, Parque Estadual de Itapuã, Viamão, RS.Dissertação de Mestrado, Universidade Federal do RioGrande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brasil.Castro, C. S. S. 2003. Home range size and pattern of rangeuse in common marmoset groups, Callithrix jacchus (Linnaeus)(Primates, Callitrichidae). Rev. Bras. Zool. 20(1):91–96.Chiarello, A. G. 2000. Density and population size ofmammals in remnants of Brazilian Atlantic forest. Conserv.Biol. 14: 1649–1657.Chiarello, A. G. 2003. Primates of the Brazilian Atlanticforest: the influence of forest fragmentation on survival.Tabela 1. Primatas avistados na RPPN Gargaú, Santa Rita, PB, e suas estimativas de abundância.Espécie N avistamentosTamanho médio Taxa de encontro Densidade estimadade grupo ± dp(grupos/10 km) (grupos/km 2 ; IC 95%)Callithrix jacchus 41 6.2 ± 3.5 1.6 9.5 (6.1 – 14.9)Cebus flavius 13 7.3 ± 2.3 0.5 2.0 (1.0 – 4.4)Alouatta belzebul 2 6 0.08 -

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 53Em: Primates in Fragments, Ecology and Conservation, L.K. Marsh (ed.), pp.99–122. Kluwer Academic/PlenumPublishers, New York.Coimbra-Filho, A. F. e Câmara, I. G. 1996. Os LimitesOriginais do Bioma Mata Atlântica na Região Nordeste doBrasil. Fundação Brasileira de Conservação da Natureza,Rio de Janeiro.Cowlishaw, G. e Dunbar, R. 2000. Primate ConservationBiology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Crockett, C. M. 1998. Conservation biology of the genusAlouatta. Int. J. Primatol. 19(3): 549–578.Cullen Jr., L. e Rudran, R. 2003. Transectos lineares naestimativa de densidade de mamíferos e aves de médioe grande porte. Em: Métodos de Estudos em Biologia daConservação e Manejo da Vida Silvestre, L. Cullen Jr, R.Pudran e C. Valladares-Pádua (eds.), pp.169–179. Editorada UFPR e Fundação O Boticário de Proteção à Natureza,Curitiba.Cullen Jr., L., Bodmer, R. E. e Pádua, C. V. 2000. Effectsof hunting in habitat fragments of the Atlantic forest,Brazil. Biol. Conserv. 95: 49–56.Faria, D. S. 1989. O estudo de campo com o mico estrelano Planalto Central brasileiro. Em: Etologia de Animaise de Homens, C. Ades (ed.), pp.109–121. EDUSP, SãoPaulo.Ferreira, J. G., Oliveira, M. M., Laroque, P. O., Fialho, M.S. e Silva, T. C. F. 2007. Situação atual e perspectivas deconservação de Cebus flavius (Primates, Cebidae). Em:Resumos do XII Congresso Brasileiro de Primatologia. XIICongresso Brasileiro de Primatologia, Belo Horizonte.Frankham, R., Ballou, J. D. e Briscoe, D. A. 2002. Introductionto Conservation Genetics. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.Franklin, I. R. 1980. Evolutionary changes in small populations.Em: Conservation Biology: An Evolutionary-EcologicalPerspective, M. E. Soulé and B. A. Wilcox (eds.),pp.135–149. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica/INPE. 2002. Atlas dos remanescentesflorestais da Mata Atlântica e ecossistemas associadosno período de 1995-2000. Relatório final, São Paulo.Galindo-Leal, C. e Câmara, I. G. 2005. Status do hotspotMata Atlântica: uma síntese. Em: Mata Atlântica – Biodiversidade,Ameaças e Perspectivas, C. Galindo-Leal e I. G.Câmara (eds.), pp.3–11. Fundação SOS Mata Atlântica eConservação Internacional, Belo Horizonte.Gaspar, D. A. 2005. Comunidade de mamíferos não-voadoresde um fragmento de floresta Atlântica semidecíduado município de Campinas, SP. Tese de Doutoramento.Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brasil.González-Sólis, J. e Guix, J. C. 2002. Considerations ondistance sampling methods applied to rainforest habitats.Em: Censuses of Vertebrates in a Brazilian Atlantic RainforestArea: The Paranapiacaba Fragment, E. Mateos, J. C.Guix, A. Serra and K. Pisciotta (eds.), pp.59–65. Universidadde Barcelona, Barcelona.González-Sólis, J., Guix, J. C., Mateos, E. e Llorens, L.2001. Population density of primates in a large fragmentof the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest. Biodivers. Conserv.10(8): 1267–1282.IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature).2008. 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Switzerland.Website: . Acessada em 8de outubro de 2008.Lima, P. J. e Heckendorff, W. D. 1985. Climatologia.Em: Atlas Geográfico do Estado da Paraíba, Governo doEstado da Paraíba, Secretaria da Educação e UFPB (eds.),pp.34–44. Grafset, João Pessoa.Marsh, L. K. 2003. The nature of fragmentation. Em:Primates in Fragments: Ecology and Conservation, L. K.Marsh (ed.), pp.1–10. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers,New York.Martins, M. M. 2005. Density of primates in four semideciduousforest fragments of São Paulo, Brazil. Biodivers.Conserv. 14(10): 2321–2329.Mendes Pontes, A. R., Brazil, C. M., Normande, I. C. ePeres, P. H. A. L. 2005. Mamíferos. Em: DiversidadeBiológica e Conservação da Floresta Atlântica ao Nortedo Rio São Francisco (Biodiversidade 14), K. C. Pôrto, J.S. Almeida-Cortez e M. Tabarelli (eds.), pp.303–321.Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Brasília.MMA (Ministério do Meio Ambiente). 2000. Avaliação eAções Prioritárias para a Conservação da Biodiversidade daMata Atlântica e Campos Sulinos. MMA/SBF, Brasília.Moura, A. C. A. 2007. Primate group size and abundancein the Caatinga dry forest, northeastern Brazil. Int. J. Primatol.28(6): 1279–1297.Muskin, A. 1984. Preliminary field observations of Callithrixaurita (Callitrichidae, Cebinae). Em: A Primatologiano Brasil, M. T. Mello (ed.), pp.79–82. SociedadeBrasileira de Primatologia, Brasília.Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Fonseca,G. A. B. e Kent, J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots forconservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858.Oliveira, M. M. e Langguth, A. 2006. Rediscovery ofMarcgrave’s capuchin monkey and designation of a neotypefor Simia flavia Schreber, 1774 (Primates, Cebidae).Bol. Mus. Nac., N.S., Zool. 523: 1–16.Oliveira, M. M. e Oliveira, J. C. C. 1993. A situação doscebídeos como indicador do estado de conservação daMata Atlântica no Estado da Paraíba, Brasil. Em: A Primatologiano Brasil 4, M. E. Yamamoto e M. B. C. Souza.(eds.), pp.155–167. Editora Universitária/UFRN, Natal.Peres, C. A. 1999. General guidelines for standardizingline-transect surveys of tropical forest primates. Neotrop.Primates 7(1): 11–16.Pinto, L. P. S., Costa, C. M. R, Strier, K. B.e Fonseca, G. A.B. 1993. Habitat, density and group size of primates in aBrazilian forest. Folia Primatol. 61: 135–143.São Bernardo, C. S. 2004. Abundância, densidade e tamanhopopulacional de aves e mamíferos cinegéticos noParque Estadual Ilha do Cardoso, SP, Brasil. Dissertaçãode Mestrado, Escola Superior de Agricultura “Luiz deQueiroz”, Piracicaba, Brasil.

54São Bernardo, C. S. e Galetti M. 2004. Densidade e tamanhopopulacional de primatas em um fragmento florestalno sudeste do Brasil. Rev. Bras. Zool. 21(4): 827–832.Shaffer, M. L. 1981. Minimum population sizes for speciesconservation. BioScience 31(2): 131–134.Silva, J. M. C. e Casteleti, C. H. M. 2005. Estado da biodiversidadeda Mata Atlântica brasileira. Em: Mata Atlântica– Biodiversidade, Ameaças e Perspectivas, C. Galindo-Leale I. G. Câmara (eds.), pp.43-59. Fundação SOS MataAtlântica e Conservação Internacional, Belo Horizonte.Stevenson, M. F. e Rylands, A. B. 1988. The marmosets,genus Callithrix. Em: Ecology and Behavior of NeotropicalPrimates, vol. 2, R. A. Mittermeier, A. B. Rylands, A. F.Coimbra-Filho e G. A. B. Fonseca (eds.), pp.131–211.World Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C.Thomas, L., Laake, J. L., Strindberg, S., Marques, F. F. C.,Buckland, S. T., Borchers, D. L., Anderson, D. R., Burnham,K. P., Hedley, S. L., Pollard, J. H., Bishop, J. R. B.e Marques T. A. 2005. Distance 5.0. Release Beta 5. ResearchUnit for Wildlife Population Assessment, Universityof St. Andrews, UK. Sítio: . Acessada em 20 de abril de 2006.Vieira, M. V., Faria, D. M., Fernandez, F. A. S., Ferrari,S. F., Freitas, S. R., Gaspar, D. A., Moura, R. T., Olifiers,N., Oliveira, P. P., Pardini, R., Pires, A. S., Ravetta,A., Mello, M. A. R., Ruiz-Miranda, C. R. e Setz, E. Z.F. 2003. Mamíferos. Em: Fragmentação de Ecossistemas:Causas e Efeitos Sobre a Biodiversidade e Recomendações dePolíticas Públicas, D. M. Rambaldi e D. A. S. Oliveira(eds.), pp.125–151. MMA/CNPq, Brasília.Distribuição e Va r i a ç ã o n a Pe l a g e m d eCa l l i c e b u s c o i m b r a i (Pr i m a t e s , Pitheciidae)n o s Es t a d o s d e Se r g i p e e Ba h i a, Br a s i lIntroduçãoMarcelo Cardoso de SousaSidnei Sampaio dos SantosMariana Coelho Marques ValenteCallicebus coimbrai (guigó) foi descrito por Kobayashi eLangguth em 1999 com base em exemplares coletados nazona da mata de Sergipe. Os mesmos autores sugeriramque a área de distribuição geográfica da espécie se restringiaà região litorânea do Estado de Sergipe e norte do Estado daBahia e apontaram a necessidade de mais estudos para umamelhor definição da distribuição geográfica e dos hábitatsocupados por C. coimbrai. Desde então, mais informaçõesforam acrescentadas ao trabalho de Kobayashi e Langguth(1999), principalmente em relação a novas áreas de ocorrênciae ao estado de conservação da espécie (Sousa, 2000,2003; van Roosmalen et al., 2002, Printes, 2005, Jerusalinskyet al., 2006). Printes (2005) registrou C. coimbrai nomunicípio de Lamarão do Passé, Bahia, e ampliou o limiteNeotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008sul de sua distribuição geográfica até o Recôncavo Baiano.Apesar do grande potencial de ocorrência em fragmentosflorestais ao longo do litoral norte da Bahia, o levantamentode informações subseqüente e o maior volume dedados provem, principalmente, do Estado de Sergipe (Jerusalinskyet al., 2006).Callicebus coimbrai é listada como “Criticamente EmPerigo” (Brasil, MMA, 2003; IUCN, 2007) devido, principalmente,à perda e fragmentação de seu hábitat e ao reduzidotamanho de suas populações em sua restrita área dedistribuição. As iniciativas de proteção da espécie aindasão incipientes e suas populações encontram-se isoladas evulneráveis à ação de caçadores. Para reverter o quadroatual, Unidades de Conservação (UCs) privadas e públicasvêm sendo propostas e criadas (por exemplo, o Refúgio deVida Silvestre Mata do Junco, criado pelo Decreto Estadualn 0 24.944 de 26/12/2007 e as Reservas Particularesdo Patrimônio Natural (RPPNs) Bomfim da Cachoeira eCastelo, no Estado de Sergipe). Neste trabalho registramosnovas áreas de ocorrência de C. coimbrai nos Estados daBahia e Sergipe, fornecemos subsídios para a avaliação doseu estado de conservação e descrevemos variações de coloraçãoda pelagem ao longo de sua distribuição.MétodosDoze fragmentos florestais em Sergipe e no norte da Bahiacom áreas variando de 300 a 3,000 ha foram selecionadosa partir de consultas a mapas de vegetação da SUDENE(escala 1:100,000) de 1974 e imagens TM/Landsat de2000. Estes fragmentos foram visitados mensalmentea partir de janeiro de 2002 para determinar a ocorrênciade C. coimbrai. Além desses maiores remanescentes florestais,cerca de 160 pequenos fragmentos de mata foramvisitados, a maior parte após indicação obtida em entrevistasesporádicas com moradores da região que relatavam apresença dos guigós naquelas pequenas áreas. A presençada espécie foi investigada percorrendo-se transectos comcomprimento médio de 1,500 m no sentido da borda parao interior da mata, e utilizando-se a reprodução de vocalizações(playback) da espécie. Em cada registro visual eramanotados o número de indivíduos, seu comportamento epadrão de coloração da pelagem, a estrutura e característicasda vegetação na qual os animais se encontravam e ascoordenadas geográficas do local.Resultados e DiscussãoDistribuiçãoRegistros visuais e auditivos foram obtidos em 70 fragmentos(31 em Sergipe e 39 no Estado da Bahia; Tabela 1).Callicebus coimbrai foi observado em fragmentos de florestarelativamente bem conservada e em áreas bastante alteradasde floresta ombrófila, floresta estacional semidecídua ecaatinga. Constatamos pouca seletividade de hábitat porparte da espécie.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 55Kobayashi e Langguth (1999) indicaram que C. coimbraiestava restrita às florestas atlânticas costeiras compreendidasentre o rio São Francisco e o rio Itapicuru e queocupavam os estratos mais baixos do dossel das florestas(Kinzey, 1981). A espécie foi registrada nas matas úmidaslitorâneas desde o rio São Francisco no município deJapoatã (36°38’O, 10°23’S), Sergipe, até o rio Paraguaçuno município de São Francisco de Paraguaçu (12°39’S,38°49’O), Bahia, e nas florestas decíduas do semi-áridoaté o município de Jeremoabo (10°00’S, 38°27’O), Bahia(Fig. 1). A ocorrência de C. coimbrai na caatinga pode estarrelacionada à distribuição geográfica original da espécie,expandida em décadas remotas quando as florestas úmidase estacionais conectavam-se com as matas secas do interior,e antes dos desmatamentos que descaracterizaram a vegetaçãooriginal e permitiram a expansão e predominânciade elementos vegetais xeromórficos no semi-árido nos diasatuais (Coimbra-Filho e Câmara, 1996). Embora os estudossobre a distribuição geográfica de C. coimbrai não estejamconcluídos (as áreas a oeste da BR101 na Bahia aindanão foram visitadas), a ampliação de sua área de ocorrênciarepresenta um passo importante para a compreensão dosprocessos que determinaram o padrão de distribuição atualda espécie.Tabela 1. Registros de Callicebus coimbrai nos Estados de Sergipe e Bahia.Localidade Hábitat 1 Área (ha) Estado 2 Coordenadas Referência 31-Assentamento Rainha dos Anjos FO 180 BA 12°23'S 38°28’O PE2-Projeto Subaumirim FO 260 BA 12°06'S 37°53’O PE3-Mata Povoado Jangada FO 60 BA 12°05'S 37°58’O PE4-Cachoeira II FO 222 BA 12°21'S 37°55’O PE5-Lontra FO 1774 BA 12°15'S 37°58’O PE6-São Jose do Aveno Bacell FO 33 BA 12°19'S 38°08’O PE7-Fazenda Coqueiro das Águas FO 110 BA 12°33'S 38°24’O PE8-Fazenda Santo Antonio FO 42 BA 12°25'S 38°21’O PE9-Mata dos Tauas FO 30 BA 12°25'S 38°24’O PE10-Altamira I FO/FS 380 BA 11°47'S 37°46’O PE11-Altamira de Evandro FO/FS 260 BA 11°46'S 37°47’O PE12-Faz Gameleira FO 770 BA 12°09'S 37°58’O PE13-Gameleira III FO 550 BA 12°04'S 38°06’O PE14-Fazenda Santa Clara FO 80 BA 12°26'S 38°32’O PE15-Miranga FO 41 BA 12°20'S 38°14’O PE16-Matas de São Miguel FO 84 BA 12°22'S 38°27’O PE17-Capão entrada Pedrão FO/FS 50 BA 12°08'S 38°37’O PE18-Serra Pedrão FO/FS 220 BA 12°10'S 38°36’O PE19-Fazenda Baixa Funda FO 91 BA 12°18'S 38°22’O PE20-Boa Vista de Opalma FO 54 BA 12°34'S 38°59’O PE21-Assentamento Bela Vista/Trindade FO 220 BA 12°29'S 38°46’O PE22-Complexo da Serra de São Francisco FO 3000 BA 12°39'S 38°49’O PE23-Pereira FO 126 BA 12°15'S 38°18’O PE24-Fazenda Calembá FS - MS 30 BA 11°21'S 28°10’O PE25-Reserva Ponder FO 84 BA 11°50'S 37°58'S PE26-Torre Telebahia FO 180 BA 11°38'S 37°53’O PE27-Fazenda Sabão FO 300 SE 11°30'S 37°34’O SO, JE, PE28-Assentamento Chico Mendes FO 50 SE 11°30'S 37°33’O JE, PE29-Fazenda Escôncio FO 250 SE 11°23'S 37°35’O JE, PE30-Mata do Crasto FO 900 SE 11°22'S 37°25’O SO, JE, PE31-Mata de Edvaldo Vereador FO 45 BA 12°25'S 38°23’O PE32-Muritiba FO 33 BA 12°25'S 38°22’O PE33-Mata Fome FO 110 BA 12°23'S 38°23’O PE34-Posto Floresta FO 22 BA 12°23'S 38°26’O PE35-Campina FO 950 BA 12°27'S 38°24’O PE36-Matas de Conde FO 100 BA 11°46'S 37°44’O PE37-Matas Indiaroba FO 30 SE 11°30'S 37°34’O PE38-Fazenda Salobro FS 50 SE 11°02'S 37°43’O JE, PE

56Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Localidade Hábitat 1 Área (ha) Estado 2 Coordenadas Referência 339-Fazenda Fortaleza FS 20 SE 11°05'S 37°40’O PE40-Mata do Convento FO 80 SE 11°28'S 37°27’O PE41-Mata da Jibóia FO 50 SE 11°27'S 37°43’O PE42-Mata do Bugio FS 200 SE 11°26'S 37°42’O JE, PE43-Mata de São Roque FS 10 SE 11°31'S 37°41’O PE, JE44-Mata do Cruzeiro FO 200 SE 11°32'S 37°41’O KL, JE, PE45-Mata do Pau Torto FO 250 SE 11°23'S 37°28’O JE, PE46-Mata Votorantim FO 160 SE 11°06'S 37°18’O PE47-Fazenda Trapsa FO 300 SE 11°12'S 37°13’O SO, JE, PE48-Nova Descoberta FO 40 SE 11°06'S 37°18’O SO, JE, PE49-Mata do Dira FO 100 SE 10°53'S 37°20’O SO, JE, PE50-Mata do Oiteiro FO 70 SE 10°39'S 37°02’O SO, JE, PE51-Mata da Aguada FO 40 SE 10°40'S 36°55’O SO, JE, PE52-Mata do Junco FO 400 SE 10°32'S 37°02’O SO, JE, PE53-Mata da Santana FS/FO 300 SE 10°32'S 36°43’O KL, SO, JE, PE54-Mata da Aiumas FO 60 SE 10°25'S 36°55’O SO, JE, PE55-Mata Cadoz FO 50 SE 10°23'S 36°38’O SO, JE, PE56-Mata da Serra Preta FS - MS 100 SE 10°29'S 37°32’O SO, JE, PE57-Lagoa do Carneiro CA 6 SE 10°12'S 37°28’O PE58-Mata do Guia CA 300 SE 10°14'S 37°29’O JE, PE59-Fazenda Venturosa CA 60 SE 10°09'S 37°42’O PE60-Jandaira FO 100 BA 11°36'S 37°36’O PE61-Pedro Alexandre FS - MS 20 BA 09°58'S 37°52’O PE62-Fazenda Mocambo FS 200 SE 10°49'S 38°05’O PE63-Mata da Bolandeira FS 15 SE 10°40'S 36°58’O PE64- Mata do Castelo FO 150 SE 11 0 20’S 37 0 27’O JE, PE65-Raso do Santo FS 10 BA 10°29'S 38°18’O PE66-Fazenda Caimbé FS - MS 60 BA 10°00'S 38°27’O PE67-Fazenda Amescla FS - MS 100 BA 09°54'S 38°20’O PE68-Fazenda Vaca Brava FS - MS 100 BA 10°42'S 38°13’O PE69-Timbó FO 10 SE 10°55'S 37°14’O PE70-Fazenda Mineiro CA 150 BA 10°03'S 38°15’O PE1FO = Floresta Ombrófila; FO/FS= Transição Floresta Ombrófila/Floresta Semidecídua; FS = Floresta Semidecídua; MS = Mata seca;CA =Caatinga.2BA = Bahia; SE = Sergipe3PE = Presente estudo; SO = Sousa, 2003; JE = Jerusalinsky et al., 2006; KL = Kobayashi e Langguth,1999.Ameaças e conservaçãoApesar do acréscimo de informações sobre a distribuiçãode C. coimbrai e a constatação de sua presença em novasáreas com tamanhos, estado de conservação e composiçãoflorística bastante diferentes, a degradação de seu hábitat ea fragmentação de suas populações ainda são uma ameaça àespécie. Mesmo que uma parte importante de sua área dedistribuição tenha sido indicada pelo Ministério de MeioAmbiente como prioritária para a conservação (Brasil,MMA, 2007), as únicas unidades de conservação de proteçãointegral que poderiam garantir a manutenção daspopulações são a Estação Ecológica do Raso da Catarinana Bahia e o Refúgio de Vida Silvestre Mata do Junco emSergipe (Fig. 1).No entanto, no Raso da Catarina C. coimbrai ocorre apenasnas formações mais úmidas e em fragmentos florestaissemidecíduos situados nas encostas e nos vales de pequenosmorros nos municípios de Jeremoabo, Antas e CíceroDantas, as quais estão situadas fora da estação ecológicaem áreas limítrofes. Outras UCs de proteção integralem Sergipe como o Parque Nacional da Serra de Itabaiana,a Reserva Biológica de Santa Isabel e o MonumentoNatural Grota do Angico não são áreas de ocorrência deC. coimbrai. O Refúgio de Vida Silvestre Mata do Junco,criado recentemente pelo Decreto Estadual n 0 24,944 de26/12/2007, foi estabelecido para assegurar a proteção deC. coimbrai. No entanto, caso não sejam adotadas açõesde manejo para a conservação da espécie, a área pode nãogarantir a sobrevivência dos guigós a longo prazo, tendo

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 57em vista tratar-se de um fragmento com 400 ha isoladoem uma matriz de pastagens e cana-de-açúcar, sem conexãocom outras áreas florestadas. Na região litorânea não existenenhuma UC municipal, estadual ou federal que assegurea proteção das populações de C. coimbrai nos dois estados.Tanto a Área de Proteção Ambiental (APA) do Litoral Sulde Sergipe quanto a APA do Litoral Norte da Bahia - únicasunidades de conservação existentes ao longo da área de distribuiçãoda espécie na Mata Atlântica - são ineficientes paraa proteção da espécie. Apesar das APAs terem como objetivosbásicos proteger a diversidade biológica, disciplinar oprocesso de ocupação humana na área e assegurar a sustentabilidadedo uso dos recursos naturais, este tipo de UC permitea ocupação humana (SNUC, 2000). Durante as pesquisasde campo obtivemos evidências de desmatamentos,queimadas, corte seletivo e caça nos fragmentos florestais,inclusive nas APAs dos dois estados (Figs. 2 e 3).Figura 1. Ocorrência de Callicebus coimbrai em Sergipe e norte da Bahia.

58As ações de fiscalização dos órgãos municipais, estaduais efederais de proteção ao meio ambiente (Instituto Brasileirodo Meio Ambiente - IBAMA, Secretaria de Meio Ambientee Recursos Hídricos - SEMARH, AdministraçãoEstadual do Meio Ambiente - ADEMA) nos dois estadosainda são incipientes e incapazes de conter o processo dedestruição das matas, e boa parte da população humanaé indiferente às questões relacionadas com a conservaçãodos remanescentes florestais. Atualmente, ações isoladasvêm contribuindo para a proteção de algumas áreasde mata e iniciativas voluntárias de associações de moradorestêm mobilizado comunidades e alguns fazendeiros.Entretanto, essas ações ainda carecem de apoio, incentivoe, no caso dos proprietários rurais, de orientação para queoficializem a proteção de seus fragmentos florestais atravésda criação de Reservas Particulares do Patrimônio Natural(RPPNs). As RPPNs são atualmente as UCs que oferecema melhor condição de proteção à espécie, cinco delas estãosituadas na Bahia - Lontra (município de Entre Rios),Panema (município de Mata de São João), Peninha e SãoJoaquim da Cabonha (município de Cachoeira), Cajueiro(município de Esplanada), e duas recém criadas no SergipeFigura 2. Desmatamento de fragmento de Mata Atlântica(Município de Santa Luzia do Itanhy-SE).Figura 3. Evidência de caça (pele e crânio, à direita, com marcasde tiro de arma de fogo). Recolhidos no município de Carmópolis-SE.Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008- Bomfim da Cachoeira e Castelo (ambas no municípiode Santa Luzia do Itanhy). Esse conjunto de RPPNs cobreuma área de cerca de 3,000 ha.As RPPNs são unidades de conservação privadas criadaspor iniciativa voluntária do proprietário e poderão ser umdos principais instrumentos para a proteção do guigó e deoutras espécies ameaçadas que ainda vivem nas matas degradadas,ilhadas e empobrecidas, através da implantação deprogramas de restauração dos fragmentos e do manejo demetapopulações. A reversão desse quadro será possível seações de educação ambiental e campanhas de conscientizaçãocaminharem lado a lado com programas de pesquisa ede proteção efetiva dos fragmentos. Importante e imprescindíveltambém é a ampliação e fortalecimento das açõesde conservação voltadas aos maiores blocos florestais do sulde Sergipe (Mata do Crasto e Fazenda Sabão) e ao longo dorecôncavo e litoral norte da Bahia. Na Bahia, o conjunto deremanescentes florestais ao longo da serra do São Franciscodo Paraguaçu (municípios de Santo Amaro, Cachoeirae Saubara), serra do Timbó (municípios de Pojuca e SãoSebastião do Passé) e ao redor da RPPN Lontra (municípiosde Entre Rios e Itanagra) abrigam as maiores áreas florestaisentre os rios Paraguçu (BA) e São Francisco (SE) ao longoda área de distribuição de C. coimbrai. Essas áreas são, atéo momento, as mais importantes para garantir populaçõesviáveis não só de C. coimbrai, mas também de outros representantesda fauna ameaçados que ainda subsistem nonorte do Estado da Bahia, como o macaco-prego-do-peitoamarelo(Cebus xanthosternos), o ouriço-preto (Chaetomissubspinosus), a preguiça-de-coleira (Bradypus torquatus), ajaguatirica (Leopardus pardalis), e os pássaros olho-de-fogorendado(Pyriglena atra), papa-formigas (Herpsilochmuspectoralis), choquinha-de-rabo-cintado (Myrmotherula urosticta)e o papagaio-chauá (Amazona rhodocorytha).Variação da pelagemAs observações de C. coimbrai nos fragmentos florestais aolongo de sua área de distribuição e de animais em cativeiropermitiram a descrição de variações no padrão de coloraçãoda pelagem da espécie, as quais podem ser encontradas emindivíduos de um mesmo grupo. Essas diferenças foramobservadas nas populações das áreas mais secas e nas matasúmidas na região litorânea e podem ter diversas causas:alteração da estrutura de pigmentos melânicos em reaçãoà fotoproteção, alimentação ou diferenças ontogenéticas.O primeiro padrão de coloração foi estabelecido com baseno holótipo coletado e fotografado por Kobayashi e Langguth(1999) na Mata Atlântica do norte de Sergipe. É umpadrão de coloração bege e ocre relativamente semelhanteao observado em indivíduos da caatinga de Sergipe, o qual,apresenta diferenças discretas nas estrias da face, e muitasemelhança na coloração do corpo estriado de bege, pretoe cinza e na mancha branca conspícua da região cervical,possivelmente característica de indivíduos juvenis. As principaisdiferenças observadas em animais nas matas secase nas matas úmidas do litoral foram: (1) a coloração daface, bochecha e fronte totalmente negra ou com estrias

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 59beges mais ou menos evidentes; (2) a coloração laranja,marrom ou marrom-alaranjada da cauda; (3) a região cervicalbranca, bege ou bege-esbranquiçada; (4) o corpo begeestriado de castanho ferrugíneo, bege e ocre, bege comestrias castanhas, cinzas e pretas e bege-brancacentas. Poroutro lado, a coloração negra das mãos e pés foi observadaem todos os indivíduos. Portanto, consideramos a coloraçãoda pelagem pouco confiável como caráter taxonômico,embora ela tenha sido utilizada juntamente com a morfometriado crânio e a dentição na descrição dessa espéciepor Kobayashi e Langguth (1999). Além disso, a coloraçãoda pelagem foi utilizada para distinguir C. coimbrai e C.barbarabrownae, apesar da variação no padrão de coloraçãodentro de uma população poder ser maior que aquelaobservada entre essas duas espécies do grupo personatus. Acarência de espécimes depositados em coleções científicascompromete a resolução deste desafio taxonômico.AgradecimentosÀ Dra Cecília Kierulff pelas críticas e sugestões aomanuscrito e à Andréa Margit, Anthony Rylands, RussellMittermeier e Michael Tobias pelo apoio. À FundaçãoMargot Marsh, Universidade Tiradentes e às Empresas JPpelo apoio financeiro para a realização do estudo.Marcelo Cardoso de Sousa, Universidade Tiradentes,Av. Murilo Dantas, 300- Aracaju-SE, CEP 49.032-490,mcsousa@infonet.com.br, Sidnei Sampaio dos Santos, AssociaçãoBaiana para a Conservação dos Recursos Naturais(ABCRN), Salvador-BA, e Mariana Coelho MarquesValente, Universidade Católica de Salvador-BAReferências Bibliográficason the 23rd of March 2007 (“Acessada em 23 de marçode 2007”).Kinzey, W. G. 1981. The titi monkey, genus Callicebus.In: Ecology and Behavior of Tropical Primates, Vol. 1, A.F. Coimbra-Filho and R. A. Mittermeier (eds.), pp.241–277. Academia Brasileira de Ciências, Rio de Janeiro,Brazil.Kobayashi, S. and Langguth, A. L. 1999. A new species oftiti monkey, Callicebus Thomas, from north-eastern Brazil(Primates, Cebidae). Rev. Bras. de Zool. 16: 531–551.Printes, R. C. 2005. Novos registros sobre a distribuiçãodo guigó da caatinga Callicebus barbarabrownae (Hershkovitz,1990) e novo limite sul de Callicebus coimbrai(Kobayashi e Langguth, 1999). Em: Programa e Livrode Resumos: XI Congresso Brasileiro de Primatologia, p.154. Sociedade Brasileira de Primatologia, Porto Alegre,Brasil.Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação (SNUC).Lei N. 9985 de 18 de julho de 2000. disponível em:http://www.universia.com.br/materia/img/ilustra/2006/abr/artigos/snuc.pdf Acessada em: 15 de maio de 2007.Sousa, M. C. 2000. New localities for Coimbra-Filho’stiti monkey, Callicebus coimbrai, in North-east Brazil.Neotrop. Primates 8(4): 151.Sousa, M. C. 2003. Distribuição do guigó (Callicebuscoimbrai) no Estado de Sergipe. Neotrop. Primates 11(2):89–91.van Roosmalen, M. G. M., van Roosmalen, T. and Mittermeier,R. A. 2002. A taxonomic review of the titi monkeys,genus Callicebus Thomas, 1903, with descriptionof two new species, Callicebus bernhardi and Callicebusstephennashi, from Brazilian Amazonia. Neotrop. Primates10 (Suppl.): 1–52.Brasil, MMA, 2003. Lista oficial das espécies da fauna brasileiraameaçada de extinção. Ministério do Meio Ambiente(MMA), Brasília. Diário oficial da união – Seção 1 101:88–97.Brasil, MMA, 2007. Relatório de Atualização de Áreas Prioritáriaspara a Conservação, Uso Sustentável e Repartiçãode Benefícios da Biodiversidade Brasileira, Ministério doMeio Ambiente (MMA), Brasília. Portaria n.9 de 23 dejaneiro de 2007.Coimbra-Filho, A. F. e Câmara, I. de G. 1996. Os limitesoriginais do Bioma Mata Atlântica na Região Nordeste doBrasil. Fundação Brasileira para a Conservação da Natureza,Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.Jerusalinsky, L., Oliveira, M. M., Pereira, R. F., Santana,V., Bastos, P. C. R. and Ferrari, S. F. 2006. Preliminaryevaluation of the conservation status of Callicebus coimbraiKobayashi & Langguth, 1999 in the Brazilian State ofSergipe. Primate Conservation. 21: 25–32.IUCN, 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.Website: http://www.iucnredlist.org. DownloadedOc c a s i o n a l Fi e l d Ob s e r v a t i o n s o f t h ePr e d a t i o n o n Mi c e, Do v e a n d An t s b yBl a c k-Tu f t e d-Ea r Ma r m o s e t s (Ca l l i t h r i xp e n i c i l l a t a)Ita de O. SilvaAdriano B. B. AlvarengaVanner BoereThe black-tufted-ear marmoset (Callithrix penicillata)mainly feeds on plant exudates which can comprise upto 70% of the diet (Miranda and Faria, 2001). Otheritems included in the diet are insects, nectar and flowers,in different proportions. Stevenson and Rylands (1988)classify marmosets from the Jacchus-group as exudativoreinsectivores.It is known that marmosets opportunisticallyfeed on protein sources i.e. prey, and that their small sizeallows for a quite diverse diet (Rylands and Faria, 1993).Insects are the most important source of protein, butother protein-rich food currently described for this speciesare ants, spiders, lizards, snails, frogs, eggs and birdhatchlings (Stevenson and Rylands, 1988; Passamani and

60Rylands, 2000). In this article, we report two new foodsources, that may be included in the diet of wild marmosets,albeit probably very rarely: mouse and dove. We alsoreport the ingestion of ants, confirming an animal fooditem in the diet of black-tufted-marmosets mentioned inthe literature. Observations on predation by marmosetswere made opportunistically when researchers observed thesocial behavior of two marmosets groups at two differentstudy sites. Both sites, the Estação Ciência São Jose (ECSJ)and the Jardim Botânico de Brasília (JBB), include manyvegetation types of the Cerrado biome. The observationswere in the cerradão, a typical forest with medium to highsemi-deciduous trees and xeromorphic vegetation (Ratteret al., 1997).Predation on a dove (Columbina talpacoti)The dove predation was observed in the ECSJ, a field stationof the Catholic University of Goiás (16º 44’ 06” S, 49º 2’48” W; Goiânia, Brazil), close to the suburb of the city, on15 March 2001. Around 08:00, a group of black-tuftedearmarmoset moved toward the area around the field laboratory,staying at approximately 3 m height in small trees(Grevillea robusta). Suddenly, the marmoset group becamevery agitated. We succeeded in recording with a digitalcamera the moment when an adult male, located approximately2 m above ground, captured a dove (C. talpacoti),immediately biting it into the head and starting to eat it(Figure 1). We did not observe the prey being shared withany other group member. The marmoset showed piloerectionduring the voracious consumption of the dove.Predation on a mouse (Mus musculus)The predation on a mouse happened in an area near theentrance of JBB (15° 55’ 58” S, 47° 51’ 02” W; Brasilia,DF, Brazil). On 20 November 2006, at 08:30 h, we sawNeotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008the reproductive female of the group capturing a mousewhile foraging in the forest understory, approximately 1.5m above ground, and immediately biting of the head of themouse (Figure 2). Although other group members, particularlyinfants, approached the female with characteristicsubmissive vocalizations, the female did not share the prey,dropping part of the carcass (mostly skin) on the ground.Predation on ants (Labidus sp.)The predation of the ants happened along a forest borderof the JBB. On 23 August 2006, beginning at 11:15 weobserved the marmosets descending to the forest understoryabove and ground close to a swarm of army ants,identified as Labidus (Ecitoninae, Formicidae) by Dr. C.R. F Brandão (Zoology Museum, São Paulo University).The marmosets caught and quickly ingested ants and didnot seem to be intimidated by the ants’ bites. This continuedfor approximately 3.5 hours. During this period, thewhole group (15 animals) accompanied the swarm front,but among them, only two male adults and two juvenilesfed on the ants.Callithrix penicillata is widely distributed throughoutthe Cerrado (Stevenson and Rylands, 1988), one of theworld’s hot spots for biodiversity conservation (Myers etal., 2000). This species, like C. jacchus, is found in urbanizedareas and has been successfully introduced in severalregions (Cunha et al, 2006; Mendes Pontes and Soares,2005; Miranda and Faria, 2001; Stevenson and Rylands,1988; Vilela and Faria, 2004). It is presumed to have aflexible and opportunistic diet. Most data available on thediet of the marmosets and tamarins is focused on fruitsand exudates, making it necessary to better describe andcomprehend the role of prey in the behavioral ecology ofCallitrichidae (Nickle & Heymann, 1996; Heymann et al.,Figure 1. Adult male of Callithrix penicillata eating a dove(Columbina talpacoti) at the Estação Ciência São Jose.Figure 2. Adult female of Callithrix penicillata biting the headof a Mus musculus individual previously captured in the forestunderstory at the Jardim Botânico de Brasília.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 612000). The predation of bird nests, mostly for obtainingeggs and hatchlings is well described (Marini and Melo,1998; Mendes Pontes and Soares, 2005), but according toStevenson and Rylands (1988), marmosets rarely feed onbirds and hatchlings when in their natural habitat. Therelevant literature has few reports on the predation of adultbirds (Cunha et al., 2006), and the predation of this speciesof dove in particular has not been previously described.The bird preyed upon is commonly found in urban areas inBrazil (Sick, 1997). The contact from this bird with marmosetgroups is presumably common in cities and their surroundingareas. The common mouse is an invasive speciesof the Brazilian fauna and is closely connected to humanactivity. The mouse predation reported here occurred inan area with pronounced human influence, and proximityto garbage cans. Newborn mice are used to complementthe diet of marmosets kept in captivity (Coimbra-Filho, etal, 1981). However, this is the first description of an adultmouse predation by a marmoset in a wild environment.Our observations on predation of the ant genus Labidusby black-tufted-ear marmoset are in line with recent observationsof Melo Jr and Zara (2007) in the Cerrados andAtlantic Forest. Rylands and collaborators (1989) andMelo Jr and Zara (2007) have already described marmosetsas predators of ants and insects that are displaced bythe raiding ant swarms. Mendes Pontes and Soares (2005)also mention the presence of ants in the marmoset’s diet.Although there is a relatively high abundance of this antspecies in the woods of the JBB, predation is not commonlyobserved. While foraging to attain the dove andthe mouse was notably an individual behavior, the antsand insects flushed by the ants were eaten while the wholegroup foraged, as described previously by Passamani andRylands (2000). The predation on the mouse and thedove, although interesting from the point of view of flexibilityin feeding habits, also adds a potential epidemiologicallink between the several diseases that are present inthe region (i.e. zoonotic hemorrhagic fevers, Figueiredo,2006) and the managing of wild marmosets in preservationareas with strong human influence. Doves and particularlymice are important agents for the dissemination of severalpathogens (Pereira et al, 2001; Sick, 1997) that infect bothhuman and non-human primates.AcknowledgmentsWe are grateful to Rui Chaves Bozza Jr. for the help withthe dove picture. We thank Dr. Carlos Roberto F. Brandão(Zoology Museum, São Paulo University) for the ant identification,Christian Hoffmann for kindly helping with theEnglish translation, and Prof. Dr. Eckhard W. Heymannfor editorial improvement of the manuscript.Ita de O. Silva, Adriano B. B. Alvarenga, and VannerBoere, Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Biologia,Departamento de Ciências Fisiológicas, CEP 70910-900,Brasília, DF, Brazil. Corresponding author: Vanner Boere,e-mail: .ReferencesCoimbra-Filho, A. F., Silva, R. R. and Pissinatti, A. 1981.Sobre a dieta de Callithrichidae em cativeiro. Rev. Biot.1: 83–93.Cunha, A. A., Vieira, M. V. and Grelle, C. E. V. 2006. Preliminaryobservations on habitat, support use and diet intwo non-native primates in an urban Atlantic forest fragment:The capuchin monkey (Cebus sp.) and the commonmarmoset (Callithrix jacchus) in the Tijuca forest, Rio deJaneiro. Urban Ecosyst. 9: 351–359.Figueiredo, L. T. M. 2006. Febres hemorrágicas por vírusno Brasil. Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop. 39: 203–210.Heymann, E. W, Knogge, C. and Tirado Herrera, E. R.2000. Vertebrate predation by sympatric tamarins, Saguinusmystax and Saguinus fuscicollis. Am. J. Primatol. 51:153–158.Marini, M. A. and Melo, C. 1998. Predators of quail eggs,and the evidence of the remains: Implications for nestpredation studies. Condor 100: 395–399.Melo Jr, T. A. and Zara, F. J. 2007. Black-tufted-ear marmosetCallithrix penicillata (Primates: Callitrichidae)following the army ant Labidus praedator (Formicidae:Ecitoninae) in the Cerrado and Atlantic Forest, Brazil.Neotrop. Primates 14: 32–33.Mendes Pontes, A. R. and Soares, M. L. 2005. Sleepingsites of common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) in defaunatedurban forest fragments: a strategy to maximize foodintake. J. Zool., Lond. 266: 55–63.Miranda, G. H. B. and Faria, D. S. 2001. Ecological aspectsof black-pincelled marmoset (Callithrix penicillata)in the cerradão and dense cerradão of the Brazilian CentralPlateau. Braz. J. Biol. 61: 397–404.Myers, N., Mittermeier, R. A., Mittermeier, C. G., Fonseca,G. A. B. and Kent, J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspotsfor conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853–858.Nickle, D.A. & Heymann, E. W. 1996. Predation on Ortopteraand other orders of insects by tamarin monkeys,Saguinus mystax mystax and Saguinus fuscicollis nigrifrons(Primates: Callitrichidae), in north-eastern Peru. J. Zool.239: 799–819.Passamani, M. and Rylands, A. B. 2000. Feeding behaviorof Geoffroy’s marmoset (Callithrix geoffroyi) in an AtlanticForest fragment of south–eastern Brazil. Primates 41:27–38.Pereira, L. E., Suzuki, A., Coimbra, T. L. M., Souza, R. P.and Chamelet, E. L. B. 2001, Ilheus arbovirus in wildbirds (Sporophila caerulescens and Molothrus bonariensis).Rev. Sau. Pub. 35: 119–123.Ratter, J. A., Ribeiro, J. F. and Bridgewater, S. 1997. TheBrazilian Cerrado vegetation and threats to its biodiversity.Ann. Bot. 80: 223–230.Rylands, A. B., Monteiro Da Cruz, M. A. O. and Ferrari,S. F. 1989. An association between marmosets and armyants in Brazil. J. Trop. Ecol. 5:113–116.Rylands, A. B. and Faria, D. S. 1993. Habitats, feedingecology and home range size in the genus Callithrix. In:Marmosets and tamarins: systematics, behaviour and ecol-

62ogy, A.B. Rylands (ed.), pp. 263–271. Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford.Sick, H. 1997. Famílias e espécies: ordem Columbiformes.In: Ornitologia Brasileira, J. F. Pacheco (ed.), pp. 341–350. Nova Fronteira, Rio de Janeiro.Stevenson, M. F. and Rylands, A.B. 1988. The marmosets,genus Callithrix. In: Ecology and behavior of Neotropicalprimates, Mittermeier, R.A., Rylands, A.B., Coimbra-Filho,A. and Fonseca, G.A.B. (eds.), pp.131–222. WWF,Washington.Vilela, S. L. and Faria, D. S. 2004. Seasonality of the activitypattern of Callithrix penicillata (Primates, Callitrichidae)in the cerrado (scrub savanna vegetation). Braz. J.Biol. 64: 363–370.Ob s e r v a t i o n o f Bl a c k-Ca p p e d Ca p u c h i n s(Ce b u s a p e l l a) Fe e d i n g o n a n Ow l Mo n k e y(Ao t u s b r u m b a c k i) in t h e Co l o m b i a n Ll a n o sXyomara Carretero-PinzónThomas R. DeflerStephen F. FerrariBlack-capped capuchins (Cebus apella) are known to feedon a wide variety of vertebrate prey, including lizards,frogs, birds, bats, marsupials, rodents, and squirrels (Izawa,1978, 1990; Terborgh, 1983; Galetti, 1990; Rímoli, 2001;Resende et al., 2003; Defler, 2004), although to date, thereis only one report involving another primate, an infant titi,Callicebus moloch (Sampaio & Ferrari, 2005). Here wedescribe the behavior of a group of black-capped capuchinsfeeding on an adult female owl monkey (Aotus brumbacki)in a fragment of gallery forest in the Colombian Llanos.This appeared to be the scavenging of a carcass, rather thana predation event, but the observation nevertheless emphasizesthe potential of the capuchins for the exploitation ofprey this size.Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008The event was recorded during the long-term monitoring(September 2005 to January 2007) of a group of 43 squirrelmonkeys, Saimiri sciureus albigena (Carretero-Pinzón,2008) on the Arrayanes Farm (3°3’30”N, 73°35’40”W)near San Martín in the Colombian Llanos, department ofMeta (Fig. 1). The group occupied a matrix of small fragmentsof gallery forest of up to 21 ha, including those onthe neighboring Santa Rosa Farm, that are interconnectedby fences. We collected quantitative behavioral data inscan samples (one minute scans at five minute intervals),and whenever an association was formed with the localgroup of Cebus apella [during 28.3% of monitoring time(1,113 hours of total observation time)]. We also collecteddata on the members of this group (1 adult male, 1 adultfemale, 2 juveniles, and 1 infant) using the same samplingschedule. During the event reported here we abandonedthis schedule and the capuchins were monitored continuouslyfor the first half hour and then at five-minute intervals,until the carcass was abandoned.On the morning of January the 12th, 2006, when thesquirrel monkeys and capuchins were foraging togetherin a mixed troop at approximately 08:35, the adult maleC. apella apparently found a dead female owl monkey(Aotus brumbacki) in a tree hole. The assumption that thecapuchin found the owl monkey rather than captured italive is based on the lack of visible or audible evidence ofhunting activity or prey capture. On finding the carcass,the adult male became visibly excited, and emitted feedingvocalizations, that were answered in kind by the fourother group members, who then approached to a distanceof 3-5 m from the tree-hole, from where they observed themale. The male pulled the owl monkey’s legs out of thehole and began biting, tearing and eating the flesh of oneof the legs. The male was the only individual to feed on thecarcass during the first eight minutes, but then he movedto a neighboring tree to rest and looked on as the othergroup members moved in to feed. The adult female andthe infant fed on the second leg; then one of the juvenilespulled the carcass out of the hole as far as its neck, bit offthe right radius and hand, and ran to the neighboring treeto consume these parts. The four individuals each spentsome 8-10 minutes feeding on different parts of the carcass.Tolerance and sharing appears to be typical of vertebratepredation in the capuchins (e.g. Perry and Rose, 1994;Resende et al., 2003), at least where relatively large-bodiedprey is concerned (Izawa, 1978). After approximately 20minutes, the adult male returned to feed on the carcass inclose proximity with the infant, while vocalizing aggressivelytowards the female, who responded submissivelyand moved to a neighboring tree. The infant eventuallyjoined the female to be groomed, and one juvenile restednearby while the other foraged for arthropods. All fivegroup members ingested parts of the owl monkey’s limbs,tail or dorsal musculature, but, while one of the juvenilesprobed the abdomen with its hand, none of the capuchinsappeared to feed on the intestines or internal organs. Curiously,Resende et al. (2003) recorded the opposite patternin the predation of a rat by C. apella, where the soft partswere consumed and the musculature ignored. In the pres-Figure 1. Location of the study area, showing the main fragmentsof gallery forest on the Arrayanes (16 ha) and Santa Rosa (21 ha)farms in the Colombian Llanos.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 63ent case, the freshness of the carcass was possibly a factor –the time of death was not known, but presumably precededthe scavenging by at least a few hours. After approximatelyone hour of intermittent feeding and resting, the capuchinsabandoned the carcass as vultures began to arrive at thescene. The remains of the owl monkey’s body – the skeletonand some fragments of skin – were found at the samelocation two days later. The capuchins moved through thisarea in the interim, but they did not approach the carcass.Capuchins are highly resourceful and opportunistic primates,able to exploit a wide variety of foods, so in thissense, the events observed here were well within the behavioralpotential of the species. As it appears that the body ofthe owl monkey was scavenged, rather than captured alive,it still remains unclear whether capuchins would normally,if ever, prey on adult primates the size of Aotus, which havea body weight of approximately 1 kg. The only record of acapuchin predation of another primate involved an infanttiti (Sampaio and Ferrari, 2005), and predation of terrestrialmammals by capuchins has involved either smallbodiedrodents or the infants of larger-bodied species, suchas coatis and opossums (Newcomer and De Farcy, 1985;Rose and Perry, 1994; Resende et al., 2003; Fragaszy etal., 2004). In this context, it is interesting to note thatSaimiri, which associates systematically with Cebus duringforaging at many sites – including the present one – isactually slightly smaller than both Aotus and Callicebus.Even so, there appear to be no reports of capuchins activelypursuing or preying on squirrel monkeys, even juveniles.In addition to other factors, in the specific case of Saimiri,the potential benefits of predation may be more than outweighedby those of the foraging association (Terborgh,1983; Boinski, 1996).AcknowledgmentsWe are grateful to the Sanchez-Rey and Novoa families,owners of the Santa Rosa and Arrayanes farms, for theirhospitality and logistic support. We also thank GermánEspinosa and Yolima González for their support in thefield, and Dr Akisato Nishimura, professors Martha Buenoand Carolina Gómez for their contributions, Liz Tyson forher review of the text and an anonymous reviewer for theircomments.Xyomara Carretero-Pinzón, Maestría en Ciencias Biológicas,Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia,e-mail: , xcarretero@gmail.com,Thomas R. Defler, Departamento de Biología, UniversidadNacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia, e -mail:, thomasdefler@hotmail.com,and Stephen F. Ferrari, Departamento de Biologia, UniversidadeFederal de Sergipe, São Cristóvão, Brazil, e-mail:ReferencesBoinski, S. 1996. Vocal coordination of troop movementin squirrel monkeys (Saimiri oerstedii and S. sciureus)and white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus). In: AdaptiveRadiations of Neotropical Primates, M. A. Norconk,A. L. Rosenberger and P. A. Garber (eds.), pp. 251–269.Plenum Press, New York.Defler, T. R. 2004. Primates of Colombia. Conservación Internacional,Bogotá.Fragszy, D. M., Visalberghi, E. and Fedigan, L. M. 2004.The Complete Capuchin: the Biology of Genus Cebus. CambridgeUniversity Press. Cambridge.Galetti, M. 1990. Predation on the squirrel, Sciurus aestuans,by capuchin monkeys, Cebus apella. Mammalia 54:152–154.Izawa, K. 1978. Frog-eating behavior of wild black-cappedcapuchin (Cebus apella). Primates 19: 633–642.Izawa, K. 1990. Rat predation by wild capuchins (Cebusapella). Field Stud. New World Monkeys, La Macarena,Colombia 3: 19–24.Newcomer, M. W. and De Farcy, D. 1985. White-facedcapuchin (Cebus capucinus) predation on a nestling coati(Nasua narica). J. Mammal. 66: 185– 186.Perry, S. and Rose, L. 1994. Begging and transfer of coatimeat by white-faced capuchin monkeys, Cebus capucinus.Primates 35: 409– 415.Resende, B. D.; Greco, V. L. G.; Ottoni, E. B. & P. Izar.2003. Some observations on the predation of small mammalsby tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Neotrop.Primates 11(2): 103– 104.Rímoli, J. 2001. Ecologia de um Grupo de Macacos-prego(Cebus apella nigritus, Goldfuss, 1809; Primates, Cebidae)na Estação Biológica de Caratinga (MG): Implicaçõespara a Conservação de Fragmentos de FlorestaAtlântica. Ph.D thesis, Universidade Federal do Pará.Sampaio, D. T. and Ferrari, S. F. 2005. Predation of aninfant titi monkey (Callicebus moloch) by tufted capuchins(Cebus apella). Folia Primatol. 76:113– 115.Terborgh, J. 1983. Five New World Primates. PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton.De n s i d a d Po b l a c i o n a l y Ta m a ñ o d e Gr u p o d eSa g u i n u s l e u c o p u s e n Pa r c h e s d e Bo s q u e e n e lDe p a r t a m e n t o d e Ca l d a s, Co l o m b i aIntroducciónNéstor Roncancio DuqueWilliam Rojas VinascoJaime Vicente Estévez VarónPor motivos históricos, geográficos y ecológicos, la mayoríade la población humana en Colombia está concentrada enla región Andina y en la planicie Caribe. En consecuencia,estas regiones son las más afectadas por la transformación

64de los ecosistemas naturales; las cordilleras y los valles interandinoshan sido altamente transformados y algunas regionesestán virtualmente deforestadas (Kattan, 1998). Así elpaís ha perdido la tercera parte de los bosques húmedospor debajo de 1,000 msnm, 98.5% de los bosques secos ysubhúmedos y 63% de los bosques andinos (Etter, 1998),todos ellos caracterizados por altos niveles de riqueza yendemismo de especies. Probablemente la ganadería ocupamás del 80% de estas áreas.La pérdida de hábitat y la degradación ambiental son engran medida los factores más importantes por las cuales losprimates están amenazados en Colombia. Actualmente losprimates son el orden de mamíferos más amenazado delpaís con 21 de sus 45 taxones dentro de las categorías deamenaza de la IUCN-Unión Internacional para la Conservaciónde la Naturaleza (Rodríguez-Mahecha et al. [ed.],2006). Para la región oriental del departamento de Caldas,de las cinco (probablemente seis) especies con distribuciónoriginal, S. leucopus en una de las únicas que aún persistey se registra comúnmente. Saguinus leucopus es endémicode Colombia, se encuentra incluido en el Apéndice I delCITES y bajo los criterios de IUCN se le considera comouna especie En peligro de extinción (EN) (Morales et al.,2008); se considera en grave peligro de desparecer debidoa su baja variabilidad genética (Leguizamón et al., 2006)y durante el X Congreso de la Sociedad Internacional dePrimatología en Japón 1990, se le declaró como especie deprioridad internacional. Su vulnerabilidad obedece a sulimitada distribución (la más reducida para cualquier especiede Saguinus), a que se encuentra en una zona con altaactividad de colonización y, es además frecuentemente vendidacomo mascota (Defler, 2003, 2004). Esta especie solose encuentra protegida en Colombia por el Parque NacionalNatural Selva de Florencia, sin embargo la importanciade esta área protegida para la conservación de S. leucopuses limitada porque solo una pequeña e intervenida proporciónde su área coincide con los límites de distribución altitudinalde la especie.Se encuentra muy poca información acerca de la biologíade este primate en toda su área de distribución y poco onada acerca de cómo esta especie ha sobrevivido a la transformación,fragmentación y aislamiento de los bosquesy cómo ha respondido a tales cambios (Vargas y Solano,1996; Cuartas, 2001; Poveda y Sánchez- Palomino, 2004;Santamaría et al., 2007). Igualmente, existe muy pocainformación acerca del estado de las poblaciones de S.leucopus en el departamento de Caldas (Vargas y Solano,1996; Santamaría et al., 2007). Dadas las condiciones detransformación del paisaje y teniendo en cuenta que antesde tomar decisiones de manejo sobre estas poblaciones esmuy importante establecer parámetros poblacionales comola densidad poblacional y la estructura y composición degrupos de la especie en los diferentes tipos de hábitat aúndisponibles, presentamos valores de densidad poblacionaly tamaño de grupo de este primate bajo las condicionespredominantes de transformación de paisaje en el orientedel departamento de Caldas.Materiales y métodosNeotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Área de estudioEl área de estudio está en el municipio de Samaná, departamentode Caldas, vertiente oriental de la Cordillera Central(5°31’00’’ N, 74°58’00’’ W) (Fig. 1). El área abarca unrango altitudinal entre los 510 y 1,010 msnm. El paisajecorresponde a un mosaico de potreros, bosques de galería,rastrojos y algunos bosques secundarios en diferentes estadosde sucesión, dominados principalmente por Guadua(Guadua angustifolia) y especies de las familias Melastomataceae,Euphorbiaceae y Moraceae (Rojas et al., 2008).Adicionalmente se encuentran unos pocos cultivos de cañapanelera y maíz. El área de estudio comprende terrenoscon un grado de pendiente muy alto, lo cual ha evitado quealgunas áreas sean usadas para actividades agropecuarias yse conserve parte de su cobertura vegetal. Por otro lado,en esta zona la práctica de actividades agrícolas se hace pormedio de rotación de parcelas, permitiendo en las usadas,el crecimiento de rastrojo por períodos de seis a siete años,generándose así un paisaje con una numerosos parches debosques secundarios, rastrojos y bosques de galería, medianamenteconectados entre sí.Estimación de densidad poblacional y tamaño de gruposLos censos para estimar la densidad de S. leucopus fueronllevados a cabo mediante el método de muestreo a distanciacon transectos lineales (Peres, 1999; Buckland et al., 2001).Se hicieron ocho transectos con una longitud total de 6.4km (longitud promedio de 0.8 km), en bosques de galería yparches de bosque conectados entre si. En cada transecto sellevaron a cabo en promedio 13 recorridos, para acumularde esta forma un esfuerzo de muestreo total de 84.5 km.Solamente incluimos los registros visuales de la especie (losanimales fueron ubicados por observación directa o al escucharsus vocalizaciones). Cada transecto fue recorrido silenciosamentea una velocidad promedio de 0.47 km/hora; loscensos fueron realizados por dos observadores independientes,llevando a cabo cada observador dos censos por día endos diferentes transectos. Los censos se llevaron a cabo apartir de las 7:30 en un transecto y las 9:30 en otro; dostransectos recorridos simultáneamente estaban localizadosa una distancia mínima de 1,500 m. El recorrido de lostransectos y la hora en que este se efectuaba se distribuyeronproporcionalmente entre los observadores, para eliminarposibles sesgos asociados a un mismo observador recorriendorepetidamente un mismo transecto y/o haciéndoloa una misma hora. Los datos para estimar las densidades deSaguinus leucopus fueron analizados con el programa DIS-TANCE 5.0 (Buckland et al., 2001). Dado el tamaño y laalta dispersión espacial de los individuos de un mismo grupode S. leucopus, y la consecuente dificultad para hacer conteosconfiables, lo cual puede ocasionar una subestimación de lasdensidades (Defler & Pintor, 1985; Pruetz & Leasor, 2002),se realizaron seguimientos a varios grupos de la zona fueradel período de censos para obtener estimaciones confiablesde su tamaño promedio. Este estudio fue realizado entre losmeses de septiembre y noviembre de 2005.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 65Figura 1. Localización del área de estudio (en negro), vereda La Primavera, corregimiento de Florencia,municipio de Samaná. Departamento de Caldas, Colombia.ResultadosSe lograron 39 registros visuales de S. leucopus. El modeloUniforme con serie de expansión Coseno arrojó el valormás bajo del criterio de información de Akaike (AIC) ymejor ajuste de las distribuciones observada y esperada dedistancias perpendiculares (X 2 =3.8 gl=7, p=0.8). El tamañopromedio de grupo se estimó a partir de los conteos de 11grupos y fue de 5.36 individuos por grupo (IC95% = 3.37– 7.35). El tamaño de los grupos varió entre dos y 13 individuos.Se estimó una densidad poblacional de S. leucopusde 149 individuos/km 2 (IC95% = 78-284) y 27 grupos/km 2 (IC95% =15-50), con un coeficiente de variación del31.9 %. La varianza de la densidad poblacional estuvocompuesta por la probabilidad de detección en un 10.8%,por la tasa de encuentro en un 53.7% y por el tamaño degrupo en un 35.5%.DiscusiónDensidad poblacionalLa densidad de S. leucopus en esta localidad es la más altaestimada para la especie. Bernstein et al. (1976) calculóentre 1 - 4 individuos/km 2 en el sur del departamento deBolívar, norte de la distribución de la especie. PosteriormenteGreen (1978) estimó 15 individuos/km 2 . En eldepartamento de Caldas, Calle (citada por Santamaría etal. 2007) estimó una densidad poblacional entre 80-100individuos/km 2 en un pequeño bosque, probablementeresultado de la presencia de remanentes de bosque despuésde una activa destrucción ocasionada por el gran númerode colonos presentes en la región. En el área de influenciadel embalse Amaní, municipios de Victoria y Norcasia, conuna cobertura vegetal de bosques mixtos y rastrojos y unárea de 1,260 ha, se estimó una densidad de 44.4 individuos/km2 (Santamaría et al., 2007).La alta densidad encontrada en el presente estudio paraS. leucopus, podría deberse a una concentración de lapoblación como respuesta a la destrucción del hábitatque originalmente ocupaba (Defler, 1981). La región hasufrido un intenso proceso de colonización y actualmentea perdido un 90% de su cobertura vegetal natural

66(CORPOCALDAS –QUINAXI, 2004). De esta maneraS. leucopus se encuentra confinada principalmente enbosques de galería y en algunos bosques secundarios endiferentes estados de sucesión. Los fragmentos de bosqueactúan como refugios de la especie, luego de haber sidoreducida su área de distribución, obligando a la población aconcentrarse en un pequeño espacio. La anterior situaciónha generado una reducción de tamaño de la poblaciónoriginal del animal y ha impuesto presiones de aislamientofísico y biótico (Kattan, 1998).Algunos autores han sugerido que las especies de Saguinusse ven favorecidas por los bosques secundarios y rastrojosgenerando el aumento de sus poblaciones (Snowdon ySoini, 1988; Defler, 2003; 2004). Probablemente S. leucopustolere cierto nivel de perturbación de hábitat, debidoa su tamaño, el cual le permite desplazarse por vegetacióncon una morfología poco robusta, como la que ofrecen losrastrojos y bosques secundarios es estos paisajes. Tambiénesta especie puede desplazarse a través de cercas vivas y dealambre (obs. pers.). Estas características podrían haberatenuado los efectos del aislamiento entre los parches debosque permitiéndole a la especie un área más amplia deactividad donde encontrar alimento y una mayor interacciónde los grupos en la población. No obstante, el mayoraporte de la tasa de encuentro a la varianza de la densidadpoblacional, sugiere que S. leucopus puede preferir ciertostipos de hábitats y está haciendo un uso diferencial de ellos.Por otra parte, es posible que la extinción local de otrosprimates y otras especies, más vulnerables por sus mayoresrequerimientos ecológicos y susceptibilidad a presiones,como la cacería, hayan favorecido la prevalencia de S. leucopusal reducirse para ésta la competencia (fenómeno decompensación de densidad) (Peres & Dolman 2000).Tamaño de grupoNeotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008El tamaño de grupo encontrado en este estudio (5.36 DS:3.38 n=11 grupos) no difiere de los reportados para laespecie en estudios realizados en paisajes similares (Vargasy Solano, 1996; Cuartas, 2001; Poveda y Sánchez- Palomino,2004; Santamaría et al., 2007). Sin embargo esnecesario adelantar estudios en áreas inalteradas para poderevaluar la influencia de las condiciones actuales, sobreel tamaño, estructura y composición de los grupos. Noobstante, otras especies del género en Colombia presentantamaños de grupo similares (Lindsay, 1980; Savage, 1989;De la Torre et al., 1995; Defler, 2003, 2004; Palacios et al.,2004). Por otro lado, se observaron grupos que podríanconsiderarse numerosos; con tamaños superiores a ochoindividuos, en su mayoría adultos. Sin embargo, un mayornúmero de individuos por grupo en este estudio no es unacondición generalizada de la población, pero puede indicarincipientes alteraciones en la estructura social, producto delaislamiento y de baja disponibilidad de hábitat, que impidela migración de individuos a otras áreas y la formación denuevos grupos (Estrada y Coates-Estrada, 1996). Ningunode los 11 grupos utilizados para calcular el tamaño promediode grupo incluía individuos juveniles o infantiles, noobstante de los 96 registros obtenidos entre observacioneshechas durante los censos y ad libitum (Altmann, 1974), seregistraron tres individuos inmaduros, dos juveniles y uninfante. Estos resultados sugieren una alteración en la actividadreproductiva de la población, posiblemente debido ala saturación de su capacidad de carga dada la alta concentraciónde individuos en el poco hábitat disponible.AgradecimientosA la Corporación Autónoma Regional de CaldasCORPOCALDAS, especialmente a Oscar Ospina, ya la Universidad de Caldas por el apoyo financiero. A lafundación Eduquemos, especialmente a Andrés FelipeBetancourt por la colaboración en múltiples aspectosque hicieron posible la ejecución del estudio. A la familiaMahecha y a Néstor Bustos por brindarnos su casa y tanagradable compañía durante las labores de campo. A AnaMaría Roncancio por la elaboración del mapa y al profesorThomas R. Defler por las sugerencias para la elaboracióndel manuscrito.Néstor Roncancio Duque, Universidad de Caldas. Maestríaen Ciencias - Biología. Universidad Nacional deColombia, e-mail: , William Rojas,Universidad de Caldas, e-mail: ,Jaime Vicente Estévez Varón, Universidad de Caldas,e-mail: ReferenciasAltmann, J. 1974. Observational study of behavior: samplingmethods. Behavior. 49: 227–265.Bernstein, I. S., Balcaen, P., Dresdale, L., Gouzoules, H.,Kavanagh, M., Patterson, T. y Newman – Warner, P.,1976. Differential effects of forest degradation on primatepopulation. Primates 17: 401– 411.Buckland, S., Anderson, D., Burnham, K., Laake, J.,Borchers, D. y Thomas, L. 2001. Introduction to the distancesampling: estimating abundance of biological populations.Oxford University press, Oxford y New York.CORPOCALDAS – QUINAXI. 2004. Convenio C043-2004 CORPOCALDAS – QUINAXI para la construcciónparticipativa de los escenarios prospectivos del plande ordenamiento ambiental de la cuenca hidrográficadel río la Miel. Manuscrito no publicado. Manizales,Colombia.Cuartas, C. A. 2001. Distribución Parcial del Tití Gris(Saguinus leucopus, Callitrichidae) en el Departamentode Antioquia, Colombia. Neotrop. Primates. 9 (3):107–110.De la Torre, S., Campos, F. y De Vries, T. 1995. Homerange and birth seasonality of Saguinus nigricollis graellsiin Ecuatorian Amazonia. Am. J. Primatol 37 (1): 39–56Defler, T. 1981. The density of Alouatta seniculus in the EasternLlanos of Colombia. Primates. 22 (.4):564–569.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 67Defler T. R. y Pintor D. 1985. Censuring primates by transectin a forest of known primate density. Int. J. Pritmatol6(3) : 243–259.Defler, T. R. 2003. Primates de Colombia. Serie de GuíasTropicales de Colombia 4. Conservación Internacional,Bogotá.Defler, T. R. 2004. Primates of Colombia. Serie de GuíasTropicales de Colombia 4. Conservación Internacional,Bogotá.Estrada, A. y Coates-Estrada, R. 1996. Tropical rain forestfragmentation and wild populations of primates at LosTuxtlas, Mexico. Int. J. Primatol. 17 (5): 759–781.Etter, A. 1998. Clasificación general de los ecosistemasde Colombia. En: Informe nacional sobre el estado de labiodiversidad. Tomo 1: Diversidad biológica, M. Chávez yN. Arango (eds.), pp. 176–185. Instituto Alexander VonHumboldt, Santa Fé de Bogotá.Frankham R., Ballou J. y Briscoe, D. 2002. Introduction toConservation Genetics. Cambrige University press, NuevaYork.Green, K. 1978. Primate censuring in northern Colombia:a comparison of two techniques. Primates 19: 537–550.Hershkovitz, P. 1977. Living new word monkeys (Platyrrhini).Vol 1. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Kattan, G. 1998. Transformación de paisajes y fragmentaciónde hábitat. En: Informe Nacional sobre el estado de laBiodiversidad. Tomo 2: Causas de pérdida de biodiversidad,M. Chávez y N. Arango (eds.), pp.76–82. Instituto AlexanderVon Humboldt, Santa Fé de Bogotá.Leguizamón, N., Ruiz, M., Castillo, M. 2006. Aplicacionesde los análisis genético poblacionales a partir degenotipos multilocus y metodologías basadas en modelosBayesianos para la conservación de la especie Saguinusleucopus. En: Conservación Ex – Situ, Investigación parael manejo en cautiverio y conservación de la fauna silvestre,N. Leguizamón, (ed.), pp.17–28. Departamento TécnicoAdministrativo del Medio Ambiente. Alcaldía Mayor deBogotá, Bogotá.Lindsay, N. 1980. A report on the field study of geoffroy´stamarin. Saguinus oedipus geoffroyi. Dodo: Journal of theJersey Wildlife Preservation Trust 17: 27–51Morales-Jiménez A.L., A. Link y P. Stevenson. 2008. Saguinusleucopus, en: IUCN 2008. 2008 IUCN Red List ofThreatened Species. . Consultadael 5 de diciembre de 2008.Palacios, E., Rodríguez, A. y Castillo, C. 2004. Preliminaryobservations on the Mottled-faced tamarin (Saguinus inustus)on the lower Río Caquetá, Colombian Amazonia.Neotrop. Primates 12(3):123–126Peres, C. A. 1999. General guidelines for standardizingline-transect surveys of tropical forest primates. Neotrop.Primates 7(1): 1–16Peres, C. A. y Dolman P. M. 2000. Density compensationin neotropical primate communities: evidence from 56hunted and nonhunted Amazonian forests of varyingproductivity. Oecologia 122: 175–189.Poveda, K. y Sánchez- Palomino, P. 2004. Habitat use bythe white-footed tamarin, Saguinus leucopus: a comparisonbetween a Forest-dwelling group and an urban group InMariquita, Colombia. Neotrop. Primates 12 (1): 6–9Rodríguez-Mahecha, J. V., Alberico, A., Trujillo, F. y Jorgenson,J. 2006. Libro Rojo de los Mamíferos de Colombia.Serie Libros Rojos de Especies Amenazadas de Colombia.Conservación Internacional Colombia y Ministerio deAmbiente. Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial, Bogotá.Rojas W., J. Estévez-V. y Roncancio N. 2008. Estructura ycomposición florística de remanentes de bosque húmedotropical en el oriente de caldas, Colombia. Bol. Cient. U.de Caldas 12: 24–37.Santamaría, M., Devenís, C., Franco, A. M., Sánchez, J.D., Mendoza, H., Pedraza, C., Forero, F. Medina, S.2007. Densidad y ecología básica del tití gris Saguinusleucopus en el área de influencia del Embalse Amaní, Norcasia,Caldas. Manuscrito no publicado, Instituto AlexanderVon Humboldt – ISAGEN, Bogotá.Savage, A. 1989. The ecology, biology, and conservationof the cotton-top tamarin in Colombia. Invited address,British Ecological Society, London.Snowdon, C. T. y. Soini, P. 1988. The tamarins, genusSaguinus. En: Ecology and behavior of neotropical primates,Vol. 2, R. A. Mittermeier, A. B. Rylands, A. Coimbra-Filho y G.A.B. Fonseca (eds.), pp.223–298. WWF-US.,Washington, D.C.Vargas, T. N. y Solano, C. L. 1996. Evaluación del estadode dos poblaciones de Saguinus leucopus para determinaráreas potenciales de conservación en un sector del Valledel Magdalena Medio, Colombia. Neotrop. Primates 4(1):13–15.Ex p a n s ã o d a Distribuição Ge o g r á f i c a d eCa l l i c e b u s b e r n h a r d i a Oe s t e d o Rio Ji-Pa r a n á,Es t a d o d e Ro n d ô n i a, Br a s i lGuilherme Reis MonçâoValquiria SelhorstJosé Alexandre Rodrigues Soares-filhoEm sua revisão sobre o gênero Callicebus Thomas, 1903,Roosmalen et al. (2002) descrevem a espécie Callicebusbernhardi e indicam que sua distribuição nos estados doAmazonas e Rondônia, Brasil, é limitada ao interflúvio dosrios Madeira ao norte, Ji-Paraná a oeste e Aripuanã-Roosevelta leste. Ferrari et al. (1996) observaram um zoguezoguecinzento na margem ocidental do rio Ji-Paraná emPimenta Bueno, Rondônia, que não apresentava o padrãode coloração marrom de C. brunneus. Roosmalen et al.(2002) afirmam que se esse indivíduo pertencesse a C.bernhardi, a distribuição desta espécie seria expandida paraoeste em toda a parte superior do rio Ji-Paraná. Nestetrabalho confirmamos a presença de C. bernhardi nosmunicípios de Pimenta Bueno e Cacoal na porção leste dorio Ji-Paraná como sugerido por Roosmalen et al. (2002)e expandimos sua distribuição para o município de AltoAlegre dos Parecis. Indivíduos foram avistados em 16 de

68fevereiro de 2008 na propriedade Santa Rita, ampliandosua área de ocorrência 90 km para oeste (Figura 1). AltoAlegre dos Parecis fica na Chapada dos Parecis (450 ma.n.n.m.) na porção sudoeste de Rondônia (IBGE, 2008).Sua vegetação original encontra-se altamente fragmentadapor projetos agropecuários.Figura 1. Distribuição geográfica de Callicebus bernhardi propostapor Roosmalen et al. (2002) e localização dos avistamentoscitados neste estudo: Alto Alegre dos Parecis (12º07’41’’S,61º51’02’’O), Pimenta Bueno (11°36’30”S, 61°09’49”O) eCacoal (11°24’13”S, 61°27’47”O).Guilherme Reis Monção, Valquiria Selhorst e JoséAlexandre Rodrigues Soares Filho, Faculdade de CiênciasBiomédicas de Cacoal/FACIMED, Pimenta Bueno,Rondônia, Brasil. Tel. (069) 3451.8092, e-mail: .ReferênciasFerrari, S. F., Iwanaga, S. e Silva, J. L. da. 1996. Platyrrhinesin Pimenta Bueno, Rondônia, Brazil. Neotrop. Primates4: 151–153.IBGE. 2008. Diagnóstico situacional de Alto Alegre dosParecis. Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística(IBGE), Brasil. Website: http://www.ibge.gov.br/cidadesat/default.php.Acessada em 10 de março de 2008.Roosmalen, M. G. M., Roosmalen, T. e Mittermeier, R.A. 2002. A taxonomic review of the titi monkeys, genusCallicebus Thomas, 1903, with the description of twonew species, Callicebus bernhardi and Callicebus stephennashi,from Brazilian Amazonia. Neotrop. Primates 10(suppl.): 1–52.NewsNo m i n a t i o n s f o r t h e Al d o Le o p o l d a n d Willi a m T. Ho rn a d a y Co n s e r v a t i o n Aw a r d sNeotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008In 2002, the American Society of Mammalogists established2 conservation awards to recognize outstandingcontributions to the conservation of mammals andtheir habitats. The Aldo Leopold Award is awarded to awell-established individual who has made a lasting scientificcontribution to the conservation of mammals andtheir habitats. The William T. Hornaday Award is awardedto a current undergraduate or graduate student who hasmade a significant scientific contribution as a student tothe conservation of mammals and their habitats. Nomineesshould have contributed substantially to the conservationof the conservation of 1 or more mammalian species,subspecies, or populations.’’Contribution’’ is interpretedas: (1) scientific research or political activism thathas resulted in the reservation of an imperiled species; (2)development of protective management recommendations;(3) acquisition of new knowledge regarding the conservationstatus or causes for declines of mammalian speciesor populations; (4) the protection of significant mammalianhabitat; or (5) promotion of the conservation ofmammals through public education. For more informationcontact Richard Thorington ThoringtonR@SI.EDUInvitación a l Pr o y e c t o d e Co n s e r v a c i ó n d e lMo n o Ch o r o Co l a Am a r i l l aActualmente la organización Neotropical Primate Conservationestá llevando a cabo un proyecto para la conservacióndel mono choro cola amarilla (Oreonax flavicauda)en el bosque de niebla al noreste de Perú. El proyecto abarcainvestigación acerca de la especie, reforestación, educaciónambiental, participación comunitária y desarrollo sustentable.Dada la magnitud del proyecto, se convoca a los interesadosen participar en el proyecto para que se pongan encontacto con Sam Shanee al correo electrónico: samshanee@gmail.com, o a través de la página web www.neoprimate.orgSam ShaneeCu r s o Me t o d o s e m Pr i m a t o l o g i a d e Ca m p oLa Sociedade Brasileira de Primatologia, em conjunto comla Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz organizam o cursoMetodos em Primatologia de Campo, nos días 31 de Janeiro– 09 de Fevereiro na Reserva Ecológica Michelin, Ituberá,Bahia. Preferência será dada a estudantes de Pós-graduaçãocon envolvimento e interesse em Primatologia. Poderãoconcorrer graduados em Biologia, Medicina Veterináriae correlatas querendo proseguir estudos com Primatas.Alunos dos últimos semestres de graduação con trabalhoou interesse em Primatas também serão considerados. Masinformação http://cursoprimatas.blogspot.com. Inscriçõescursoprimatas@gmail.com

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 69Cu r s o e n Et o l o g í a y Bi e n e s t a r e n An i m a l e sSi l ve s t re sSe invita a todos los interesados a participar en el curso enEtología y Bienestar en Animales Silvestres, el cual se llevaráa cabo del 24 al 27 de marzo del presente año en la ciudadde Lima, Perú. El curso está dirigido principalmente aestudiantes de pre-grado, egresados, técnicos, cuidadores yprofesionales relacionados con el estudio de la etología yel bienestar animal en centros de conservación ex situ. Elcurso constará de una parte teórica y un taller prácticode capacidad limitada; se han puesto a disposición ciertonúmero de becas. Para mayores informes contactar a CeliaM. Díaz Gonzáles: celiadiaz_vet@yahoo.com , o escribir afaunavet.peru@gmail.comAlém de NÃO transmitirem à doença para o homem,os bugios NÃO são os responsáveis pelo rápido avançoda doença no Estado. Eles são as principais vítimas. Asmudanças climáticas e a degradação ambiental provocadaspelo homem são as principais responsáveis pelo recenteaparecimento de inúmeras doenças infecciosas no Estado.Especialistas acreditam que o avanço da doença tem sidofacilitado pelo deslocamento de pessoas infectadas ou peladispersão dos mosquitos ou outro hospedeiro ainda desconhecido.Pergunto: “Você mataria o seu anjo da guarda?”Dr. Júlio César Bicca-MarquesProfessor TitularGrupo de Pesquisa em PrimatologiaFaculdade de Biociências/PUCRSCa m p a n h a “Pr o t e j a s e u An j o d a Gu a r d a”!A febre amarela é uma doença infecciosa causada por umvírus que é transmitido por mosquitos. Existem doistipos: a febre amarela urbana, erradicada do Brasil porvolta da década de 1960, e a febre amarela silvestre. Osvetores (agentes responsáveis pela transmissão) da formasilvestre são mosquitos dos gêneros Haemagogus e Sabethes,enquanto a forma urbana pode ser transmitida pelo Aedesaegypti, o mesmo vetor da dengue.A febre amarela silvestre já provocou a morte de algumaspessoas e de muitos bugios em uma extensa área do RioGrande do Sul desde o final de 2008. No entanto, aocontrário da maioria das pessoas, os bugios são extremamentesensíveis à doença, morrendo em poucos dias apóscontraí-la. Esses macacos já estão ameaçados de extinçãono Estado devido à destruição de seu hábitat natural (asflorestas), à caça e ao comércio ilegal de mascotes. Infelizmente,os bugios também estão sendo vítimas da doençae da falta de informação da população. Inúmeros relatosindicam que habitantes das regiões de ocorrência dobugio-preto e do bugio-ruivo estão matando os animais,principalmente por envenenamento, por medo do avançoda doença. Além de tornar mais crítico o estado de conservaçãodesses animais, essa atitude é extremamente prejudicialpara o próprio homem. A morte de bugios por febreamarela alerta os órgãos de saúde locais sobre a circulaçãodo vírus na região, os quais promovem campanhas de vacinaçãoda população humana, como se tem observado emquase 200 municípios do Estado. O Ministério da Saúdeconsidera esses macacos importantes “sentinelas” da circulaçãodo vírus. Portanto, os bugios são nossos “ANJOS DAGUARDA”! Se eles forem mortos pelo homem, descobriremosque a febre amarela chegou a determinada regiãoapenas quando as pessoas contraírem a doença. E talvez jáseja tarde para algumas (ou muitas)...Recent PublicationsBo o k sSouth American Primates: Comparative Perspectives in theStudy of Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation (Developmentsin Primatology: Progress and Prospects), edited by P. A.Garber, A. Estrada, J. C. Bicca-Marques, E. Heymannand K. B. Strier. 2008. Springer. 447pp. ISBN: 978-0387787046. The focus of each chapter is to examinethe nature and range of primate responses to changes intheir ecological and social environments, and to use dataon South American monkeys to address critical theoreticalquestions in the study of primate behavior, ecology, andconservation. Contents: 1. Advancing the study of southAmerican primates – P. A. Garber & A. Estrada; 2. Thediversity of the new world primates (Platyrrhini), anannotated taxonomy – A. B. Rylands & R. A. Mittermeier;3. Paleogeography of the South Atlantic: a route for primatesand rodents into the new world? – F. B. de Oliveira, E. C.Molina and G. Marroig; 4. Platyrrhine ecophylogeneticsin space and time – A. L. Rosenberger, M. F. Tejedor, S. B.Cooke and S. PekarSpider Monkeys: The Biology, Behavior and Ecology of the GenusAteles, edited by Christina J. Campbell. 2008. CambridgeUniversity Press. 352pp. ISBN: 978-0521867504. Spidermonkeys are traditionally very difficult to study in thewild, but there has been an expansion in research beingcarried out on this genus in the past decade. This book is anassimilation of both published and previously unpublishedresearch on spider monkeys, it is a comprehensive source ofinformation for academic researchers and graduate studentsinterested in primatology, evolutionary anthropology andbehavioral ecology and covers topics such as taxonomy,diet, sexuality and reproduction, and conservation.

70The Biology of Traditions: Models and Evidence, edited byD. M. Fragaszy and S. Perry. Cambridge University Press.476pp. ISBN: 978-0521087308. This book exploressocially-maintained behavioral traditions in animals otherthan humans. Uniquely, it treats traditions as biologicalphenomena amenable to comparative evaluation inthe same way as other biological phenomena. It is alsoconcerned with how widely shared features of social lifeand learning abilities can lead to traditions in many species.It differs from other books in its emphasis on explicitevaluation of alternative theories and methods, and in thebreadth of species covered. It will be essential reading forstudents and researchers in behaviour, anthropology andpsychology. Contents: 1. Towards a biology of traditions– D. M. Fragaszy and S. Perry; 2. What the models sayabout social learning – K. N. Laland and J. R. Kendal;3. Relative brain size and the distribution of innovationand social learning across the nonhuman primates – S. M.Reader; 4. Social learning about food in birds – L. Lefebvre& J. Bouchard; 5. The cue reliability approach to socialtransmission: designing tests for adaptive traditions – G.Dewar; 6. Traditional foraging behaviors of brown and blackrats – B. G. Galef Jr.; 7. Food for thought. Social learningabout food feeding capuchin monkeys – E. Visalberghiand E. Addessi; 8. Traditions in mammalian and avianvocal communication – V. M. Janik and P. J. B. Slater; 9.Like mother, like calf: the ontogeny of foraging traditionsin wild Indian Ocean bottlenose dolphins – J. Mann andB. Sageant; 10. Biological and ecological foundations ofprimate behavioral tradition – M.A. Huffman & S. Hirata;11. Local traditions in orangutans and chimpanzees:social learning and social tolerance – C. P. Van Schaik; 12.Developmental perspectives on great ape traditions – A. E.Russon; 13. Do brown capuchins socially learn foragingskills? – S. Boinski, R. P. Quatrone, K. Sughrue, L. Selvaggi,M. Henry, C. M. Stickler and L. M. Rose; 14. Traditionsinn wild white-faced capuchin monkeys – S. Perry, M.Panger, L. M. Rose, M. Baker, J. Gros-Louis, K. Jack, K.C. Mackinnon, J. Manson, L. Fedigan and K. Pyle; 15.Conclusions and research agendas – S. Perry.Ar t i c l e sAgostini, I., Holzmann, I., and Di Bitetti, M. S. 2008.Infant hybrids in a newly formed mixed-species groupof howler monkeys (Alouatta guariba clamitans and Alouattacaraya) in northeastern Argentina. Primates. 49(4):304–307Amendola Pimenta, M., Rico-Gray, V. and Pinero Dalmau,D. 2008. Habitat disturbance and genetic variability ofpopulations of black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra) inCampeche, Mexico: implications for conservation. Am. J.Primatol. 70(Suppl 1): 31–32Anemone, R., Dirks, W., Moore, W., Van Regenmorter, J.,Marshall, J., Felder, I. and DeMeester, E. 2008. GIS andprimate biostratigraphy in the early Eocene of southwesternWyoming. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. (Suppl 46): 60Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Aquino, R., Terrones, W., Cornejo, F. and Heymann, E. W.2008. Geographic distribution and possible taxonomicdistinction of Callicebus torquatus populations in PeruvianAmazonia. Am. J. Primatol. 70(12): 1181–1186Araripe, J., Tagliaro, C. H., Rego, P. S., Sampaio, I., Ferrari,S. F. and Schneider, H. 2008. Molecular phylogeneticsof large-bodied tamarins, Saguinus spp. Zool. Scripta.37(5): 461–467.Arroyo- Rodríguez, V., Mandujano, S. and Benítez-Malvido,J. 2008. Landscape attributes affecting patch occupancyby howler monkeys (Alouatta palliata mexicana) atLos Tuxtlas, Mexico. Am. J. Primatol. 70(1): 69–77Asensio, N., Korstjens, A. H., Schaffner, C. M. and Aureli,F. 2008. Intragroup aggression, fission-fusion dynamicsand feeding competition in spider monkeys. Behaviour.145(7): 983–1001Asensio, N., Korstjens, A. H. and Aureli, F. 2008. Rangingcosts in wild monkeys. Folia Primatol. 79(5): 310Beard, K. C. 2008. The oldest North American primateand mammalian biogeography during the Paleocene-EoceneThermal Maximum. Proceed. Nat. Academy Sciences.USA. 105(10): 3815–3818Bezerra, B. M; Souto A. 2008. Structure and usage of thevocal repertorie of Callithrix jacchus. Int. J. Primatol.29(3): 671–701Bicca-Marques, J. C., Prates, H. M., de Aguiar, F. R. C.and Jones, C. B. 2008. Survey of Alouatta caraya, theblack and gold howler monkey, and Alouatta guaribaclamitans, the brown howler monkey, in a contact zone,State of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil: evidence of hybridization.Primates. 49(4): 246–252Bonilla-Sanchez, Y. M., Serio-Silva, J. C., Pozo-Montuy,G. and Bynum, N. 2008. Demography of Alouatta pigrain threatened habitat in south-eastern Mexico. Am. J.Prim. (Suppl1): 52Boubli, J. P., da Silva, M. N. F., Amado, M. V., Hrbek, T.,Puntual, F. B. and Farias, I. P. 2008. A taxonomic reassessmentof Cacajao melanocephalus, with the descriptionof two new species. Int. J. Prim. 29(3): 723–741Boubli, J. P. and Tokuda, M. 2008. Socioecology of blackuakari monkeys, Cacajao hosomi, in Pico da Neblina NationalPark, Brazil: The role of the peculiar spatial-temporaldistribution of resources in the Neblina forest. Prim.Report. 75: 3–10Boyle, S. A. 2008. Human impacts on primate conservationin central Amazonia. Trop. Cons. Science. 1(1): 6–17Bravo, S. P. 2008. Seed dispersal and ingestion of insect-infestedseeds by black howler monkeys in flooded forest ofthe Paraná River, Argentina. Biotropica. 40(4): 471–476Bustos, C. A., Corkum, L. D., Slater, K. Y. and Mennill,D. J. 2008. Acoustic characteristics of the vocalizations ofmantled howler monkeys (Alouatta palliata) in the fragmentedlow-land forests of Honduras. Am. J. Primatol.(Suppl 1): 68Carrillo-Bilbao, G. A., Bravo, J. J., Martin, S. and Huynen,M. C. 2008. A preliminary study of the primate communityin the protected area of Oglan Alto, Araujo-Pastaza,Ecuador. Folia Primatol. 79(5): 318–319

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 71Cornejo, F. M., Aquino, R. and Jiménez, C. 2008. Noteson the natural history, distribution and conservationstatus of the Andean night monkeys, Aotus miconax.Prim. Cons. 23: 1–4Crofoot, M. C., Gilby, I. C., Wikelski, M. C. and Kays,R. W. Interaction location outweighs the competitive advantageof numerical superiority in Cebus capucinus intergroupcontests. Proceed. Nat. Academy Sciences. USA.105(2): 577–581Decanini, D. P and Macedo, R. H. 2008. Sociality in Callithrixpenicillata: Intragroup male profile. Int. J. Primatol.29(2): 433–447Decanini, D. P. and Mecddo, R. H. 2008. Sociality in Callithrixpenicillata: Individual strategies during intergroupencounters. Int. J. Primatol. 29(2): 627–639Depeine, C. D., Rotundo, M., Juarez, C. P. and Fernandez-Duque,E. 2008. Hoot calling in owl monkeys (Aotusazarai) of Argentina: sex differences and function. Am. J.Primatol. 70(Supp 1): 69de Freitas, C. H., Setz, E. Z. F., Araujo, A. R. B. and Gobbi,N. 2008. Agricultural crops in the diet of bearded capuchinmonkeys, Cebus libidinosus, in forest fragments insoutheast Brazil. Rev. Brasil. Zool. 25(1): 32–39Dias, P. A. D., Rodríguez-Luna, E. and Canales Espinosa,D. 2008. The functions of the “greeting ceremony” amongmale mantled howlers (Alouatta palliata) on AgaltepecIsland, Mexico. Am. J. Primatol. 70(7): 621–628Dunn, J. C., Azkarate, J. C. and Vea Baro, J. J. 2008. Thefeeding ecology of the mantled howler monkey (Alouattapalliata): coping strategies in altered landscapes. FoliaPrimatol. 79(5): 299–300Fagundes, V., Paes, M. F., Chaves, P. B., Mendes, S. L., Possamai,C. B., Boubli, J. P. and Strier, K. B. 2008. Geneticstructre in two northern muriqui populations (Brachyteleshypoxanthus) as inferred from fecal DNA. Gen. & Mol.Biol. 31(1): 166–171Fedigan, L. M., Carnegie, S. D. and Jack, K. M. 2008.Predictors of reproductive success in female white-facedcapuchins (Cebus capucinus). Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.137(1): 82–90Fernandez-Duque, E., Di Fiore, A. and Carrillo-Bilbao, G.2008. Behavior, ecology and demography of Aotus vociferansin Yasuni National Park, Ecuador. Int. J. Primatol.29(2): 421–431Ferrari, S. F., Veiga, L. M. and Urbani, B. 2008. Geophagyin New World monkeys (Platyrhini): ecological and geographicpatterns. Folia Primatol. 79(5): 402–415Fabian, K. K. M. C., Spohr, K. A. H., Malanski, L. S.,Svoboda, W. K., Shiozawa, M. M., Hilst, C. L. S., Aguiar,L. M., Ludwing, G., Passos, F. C., Navarro, I. T., Balarin,M. R. S. and Lisboa, J. A. N. 2008. Hematologic valuesof free-ranging Cebus cay and Cebus nigritus in southernBrazil. Int. J. Primatol. 29(5): 1374–1382Fortes, V. B. and Bicca-Marques, J. C. 2008. Abnormalpelage color in an isolated population of Alouatta guaribaclamitans, in south Brazil. Int. J. Primatol. 29(3):717–722Gibson, K. N., Vick, L. G., Palma, A. C. and del RocioCarrasco, F. M. 2008. Intra-community infanticide andforced copulation in spider monkeys: a multi-site comparisionbetween Cocha Cashu, Peru and Punta Laguna,Mexico. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. Suppl 46: 103Gros-Louis, J. J., Perry, S. E., Fichtel, C., Wikberg, E.,Giljenson, H., Wofsy, S. and Fuentes, A. 2008. Vocalrepertorie of Cebus capucinus: acoustic structure, contextand usage. Int. J. Primatol. 29(3): 641–670Hirano, Z. M. B., Correa, I. C. and Oliveira, D. A. G.2008. Contexts of rubbing behavior in Alouatta guaribaclamitans: a scent-marking role?. Am. J. Primatol. 70(6):575–583Jack, K. M., Lenz, B.B., Healan, E., Rudman, S., Schoof,V. A. M. and Fedigan, L. 2008. The effects of observerpresence on the behavior of Cebus capucinus in CostaRica. Am. J. Primatol. 70(5): 490–494Jasso, C. and Estrada, A. 2008. Tropical rain forest fragmentationand social interactions in young howler monkeys(Alouatta palliata). Am. J. Primatol. 70(Suppl 1):51–52Juarez, C. P., Berg, W. J. and Fernandez-Duque, E. 2008.An evaluation of the potential long-term effects of radiocollarson the reproduction and demography of owl monkeys(Aotus azarai) in Formosa, Argentina. Am. J. Primatol.70(Suppl 1): 49Kauffman, L. and Boinski, S. 2008. Do primates see ecoturistsas potential predators?. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol.Suppl 46: 128Lapenta, M. J., Procopio-de-Oliveira, P., Kierulff, M. C.M. and Motta, J. C. 2008. Frugivory abd seed dispersalof golden lion tamarins (Leonthopitecus rosalia) in aforest fragment in the Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Brazil. J.Biol. 68(2): 241–249Lapenta, M. J. and Procopio-de-Oliveira, P. 2008. Someaspects of seed dispersal effectiveness of golden lion tamarins(Leontopithecus rosalia) in Brazilian Atlantic Forest.Trop. Cons. Science. 1(2): 122–139Ludwing, G., Aguiar, L. M., Svoboda, W. K., Hilst, C. L.S., Navarro, I. T., Vitule, J. R. S. and Passos, F. C. 2008.Comparison of the diet of Alouatta caraya, between a riparianisland and mainland on the upper Parana river,southern Brazil. Rev. Brasil. Zool. 25(3): 419–426Lynch Alfaro, J. 2008. Scream-embrace displays in wildblack-horned capuchin monkeys. Am. J. Primatol. 70(6):551–559Maia da Silva, F., Naiff, R. D., Marcili, A., Gordo, M.,D’Affonseca Neto, J. A., Naiff, M. F., Franco, A. M. R.,Campaner, M., Valente, V., Valente, S. A., Camargo, E.P., Teixeira, M. M. G. and Miles, M. A. 2008. Infectionrates and genotypes of Trypanosoma rangeli and T. cruziinfecting free-ranging Saguinus bicolor, a critically endangeredprimate of the Amazon Rainforest. Acta Tropica.107(2): 168–173Maldonado, A. and Bearder, S. 2008. Assessing the impactof hunting on harvest-sensitive primates within protectedareas and indigenous lands in Colombian Amazon. FoliaPrimatol. 79(5): 357–358

72Milton, K., Lozier, J. D. and Lacey, E. A. 2008. Geneticstructure of an isolated population of mantled howlermonkeys (Alouatta palliata) on Barro Colorado Island,Panama. Cons. Gen. 1–12Muñoz, D., Estrada, A. and del Valle, Y. G. 2008. Surveyand conservation of a relict population of spider monkeys(Ateles geoffroyi) in the Sumidero Canyon, Mexico. Trop.Cons. Science. 1(2): 151–162Nascimento, F. F., Bonvicino, C. R., Oliveira, M. M., Schneider,M. P. C. and Seuanez, H. N. 2008. Populationgenetics studies of Alouatta belzebul from the Amazonianand Atlantic forests. Am. J. Primatol. 70(5): 423–431Oliverira, V. B., Linares, A. M., Correa, G. L. C. andChiarello, A. G. 2008. Predation on the black capuchinmonkey, Cebus nigritus, by domestic dogs, Canis lupusfamiliaris, in the Parque Estadual Serra do Brigadeiro,Brazil. Rev. Brasil. Zool. 25(2): 376–378Ortiz-Martinez, T., Rico-Gray, V. and Martinez, M. E.2008. Predicted and verified distributions of Ateles geoffroyiand Alouatta palliata in Oaxaca, Mexico. Primates.49(3): 186–194Parr, N., Campos, F., Childers, A., Fedigan, L. and Jack,K. 2008. Dry season ranging behavior and intergrouprelations in white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus) atSanra Rosa National Park, Costa Rica. Am. J. Primatol.70(Suppl 1): 53Perea-Rodriguez, J. P., Milano, A. M., Fernandez-Duque,E. and Osherov, B. E. 2008. Gastrointesnital parasites ofowl monkeys (Aotus azarai) living in edge and non-edgeterritories in a gallery forest in northern Argentina. Am .J. Primatol. 70(Suppl 1): 53Perry, S. E., Muñiz, L., Manson, J. H., Gros-Louis, J. andVigilant, L. 2008. Kin biased social behavior in wildWhite-faced capuchin monkeys (Cebus capucinus). Am. J.Phys. Anthropol. Suppl 46: 171Pozo-Montuy, G., Serio-Silva, J. C. and Bonilla-Sánchez,Y. M. 2008. The effects of the anthropogenic pressureon the behaviour and demography of the black howlermonkey (Alouatta pigra) in south-eastern Mexico. Am. J.Primatol. 70(Suppl 1): 52Pozo-Montuy, G., Serio-Silva, JC., Bonilla-Sánchez, Y. M.,Bynum, N. and Landgrave, R. 2008. Current status ofthe habitat and population of the black howler monkey(Alouatta pigra) in Balancan, Mexico. Am. J. Primatol.70(12): 1169–1176Prates, H. M. and Bicca-Marques, J. C. 2008. Age-sexanalysis of activity budget, diet and positional behaviorin Alouatta caraya in an orchard forest. Int. J. Primatol.29(3): 703–715Ryan, S. J., Starks, P. T., Milton, K. and Getz, W. M. 2008.Intersexual conflict and group size in Alouatta palliata: a23 year evaluation. Int. J. Primatol. 29(2): 405–420Savage, A., Thomas, L., Leighty, K., Soto, L., Causado,J. and Medina, F. 2008. The development of a censustechnique for cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) inColombia. Am. J. Primatol. 70(Suppl 1): 23Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Schaffner, C. M. and Aureli, F. 2008. The implecationsof fission-fusion dynamics for social interactions in wildspider monkeys. Folia Primatol. 79(5): 379–380Serio-Silva, J. C., Pozo-Montuy, G. and Bonilla-Sánchez,Y. 2008. Black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra) populationsin a regional landscape: low basin of Usumacintariver at southern of Mexico. Am. J. Primatol. 70(Suppl1): 48Shanee, N., Shanee, S. and Maldonado, A. M. 2008. Preliminaryinformation on the current status of the yellowtailedwoolly monkey (Oreonax flavicauda) at Yambrasbamba,Peru. Folia Primatol. 79(5): 381–381Sousa, M. B. C. and Pontes, M. C. 2008. Diurnal temporalvariation in affiliative behaviors of common marmosets(Callithrix jacchus) males living in natural conditions.Rev. Brasil. Zoociencias. 10(1): 7–12Stevenson, P. R. and Aldana, A. M. 2008. Potential effectsof ateline extinction and forest fragmentation on plantdiversity and composition in western Orinoco Basin, Colombia.Int. J. Primatol. 29(2): 365–377Stojan-Dolar, M. and Heymann, E. W. 2008. Vigilance onmixed-species and single-species groups of moustachedtamarins (Saguinus mystax) in Peruvian Amazonia. FoliaPrimatol. 79(5): 388Trejo-Macias, G., Estrada, A. and Mosqueda, C. M. A.2008. Preliminary study of gastrointestinal helmints inhowler monkeys (Alouatta palliata) living in a cacao plantationin southern Mexico. Am. J. Primatol. 70(Suppl1): 53Valenta, K. and Redigan, L. M. 2008. How much is a lot?Seed dispersal by white-faced capuchins and implicationsfor disperser-based studies of seed dispersal systems. Primates.49(3): 169–175Van Belle, S. and Estrada, A. 2008. Group size and compositioninfluence male and female reproductive success inblack howler monkeys (Alouatta pigra). Am. J. Primatol.70(6): 613–619Visalberghi, E., Sabbatini, G., Spagnoletti, N., Andrade, F.R. D., Ottoni, E., Izar, P. and Fragaszy, D. 2008. Physicalproperties of palm fruits processed with tools by wildbearded capuchins (Cebus libidinosus). Am. J. Primatol.70(9): 884–891Wallace, R. B. 2008. The influence of feeding patch sizeand relative fruit density on the foraging behavior on theblack spider monkey Ateles chamek. Biotropica. 40(4):501–506Wheeler, B. C. 2008. Selfish or altruistic? An analysis ofalarm call function in wild capuchin monkeys, Cebusapella nigritus. Anim. Behav. 76(5): 1465–1475Yamamoto, M. E., Albuquerque, F. S., Lopes, N. A. andFerreira, E. S. 2008. Differential infant carrying in captiveand wild common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus).Acta. Ethol. 11(2): 95–99

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 73Ab s t r a c t sSelected abstracts from the XXII Congress of the InternationalPrimatological Society. Edinburgh, Scotland,August 3-8, 2008.Addessi, E., Spagnoletti, N., and Visalberghi E. Wildbearded capuchin monkeys (Cebus libidinosus) selectfunctional hammer tools.Anderson, J. R., Hattori, Y., Kuwahata, H., Kuroshima,H., Vick, S., Fujita and K., Gaze between new worldmonkeys and humans.Araújo, Jr. A. C., Didonet, J. J., Araújo, C. S., Saletti, P. G.,Borges, T. R. J. and Pessoa, V. F. Colour vision discriminationin the black howler monkey (Alouatta caraya).Arruda, M. F., Alencar, A. I., Sousa, M. B. C. and Araujo,A. Mating systems and female-female competition in thecommon marmoset, Callithrix jacchus.Arruda, M. F., Cutrim, F. H. R. and Ribeiro, M. D. P. Activitypattern of wild Callithrix jacchus along infant andjuvenile periods.Aureli, F. and Schaffner, C. M. Outcome of approaches inwild spider monkeys.Bales, K. L., Jarcho M. R., Mason W. A. and Mendoza,S. P. Intranasal vasopressin administration modulatespair-bonding in monogamous titi monkeys (Callicebuscupreus).Barnes, J. L. and Santos, L. R. Spontaneus helping behaviorin capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)?Barnett, A. A., Bezerra, B. M., MacLarnon, A. and Ross, C.Hard-fruits and black waters: the conservation ecology ofgolden-backed uacari, Cacajao ouakary, an extreme dietand habitat specialist.Behie, A. M., Pavelka, M. S. M. and Chapman, C. A.Variation in fecal cortisol levels in a wild vlack howlerpopulation in southern Belize.Benitez, M. E., Anestis, S. F., Santos, L. R.and Bribiescas,R. G. Non-invasive salivary collection techniques in captivebrown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella).Bergstrom, M. L. and Fedigan, L. M. Maternal kin biasamong female white-faced capuchins.Bettridge, C. M., Dunbar, R. I. M. and Lehmann, J. Timeand predation as constraints on primate biogeography.Bezanson, M. and Raichlen, D. A. Bringing the lab intothe field: kinematics during quadrupedal walking inCebus capucinus.Bezerra, B. M., Barnett, A., Silva, Jr. S. J., Souto, A. S. andJones, G. Sounding out species: holes in our distributionalknowledge of Amazonian primates, and the potentialfor call playback as a survey technique.Bicca-Marques, J. C., Muhle, C. B., Prates, H. M., Oliveira,S. G. and Calegaro-Marques, C. Habitat deteriorationand unexpected trophic niche broadening: a casestudy on egg-eating by black-and-gold howler monkeys(Alouatta caraya).Blair, M. and Melnick, D. The effect of habitat fragmentationon population genetic structure in the CentralAmerican squirrel monkey (Saimiri oerstedii).Boubli, J. P. and De Lima, M. G. Challenges of assessingconservation status of Neotropical primates of genusCacajao.Bowell, V. A., Rumble, R. J. and Buchanan-Smith, H. M.Reducing the stress of capture through the use of positivereinforcement training and positive human interactionsin common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus).Boyle, S. A., Smith, A. T. and Spironello, W. Forest fragmentationin central Amazonia and its consequences forthe brown bearded saki, Chiropotes satanas chiripotes.Bridgett, C. R. and Pavelka, M. S. M. Effects of folivoryversus frugivory on ranging in black howlers.Brown, C., Gordon, M., Becker, M. and Alipour, F. Thecase for biomechanical lateralization of the squirrelmonkey larynx.Brunce, J. A. and Isbell, L. A. Does colour vision explainvariation in foraging behavior for wild titi monkeys (Callicebusbrunneus).Bueno, R. and Galetti, M. Status of primate populationsin protected areas of south east Sao Paulo Atlantic forest,Brazil.Burkart, J. M., Foglia, M. and Strasser, A. Trade-offs betweensocial learning and innovativeness in commonmarmosets (Callithrix jacchus)?Carnegie, S. D., Fedigan, L. M. and Ziegler, T. E. Predictorsof allomaternal care in Cebus capucinus.Carretero Pinzón, X., Defler, T. R. and Ruíz García, M.Fence-rows as biological corridors: an important tool forprimate conservation in Colombian Llanos.Castelo-Branco, R., Leitao, M., Serra, B., Pessoa, D. M.A. and Sousa, M. B. C. Response to children’s toys incommon marmosets (Callithrix jacchus).Chabrawi, S., Ajuz, R. C., Pessoa, V. F. and Araujo, M. F.Color discrimination on detecting food target of Alouattacaraya (Primates, Atelidae).Chowdhury, S., Fernandez-Duque, E. and Rudran, R. Influenceof group structure on life histories of female redhowler monkeys (Alouatta seniculus).Coelho, C. G., Ramos-da-Silva, E. D. and Ottoni, E. B.Opportunities for social learning of nut-cracking behaviorby two populations of capuchin monkeys: semi-freeraning (Cebus sp.) and wild Cerrado populations (Cebuslibidinosus).Coles, R. C., Talebi, M. G. and Lee, P. C. Fission-fusionsociality in southern muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoids) inthe continuous atlantic forest of Brazil.Cornejo, F. M. Aspects of the ecology and behavior of jeyellow tailed woolly monkeys Oreonax flavicauda.Cortes-Ortiz, L. Phylogeography of Mesoamerican howlermonkeys.Crescimbene, L., Mancini, A., Addessi, E. and Visalberghi,E. Symbolic use on tokens in capuchin monkeys (Cebusapella)?Cronin, K. A., Snowdon, C. T. and Silk, J. B. Performanceof cottontop tamarins (Saguinus Oedipus) on a food donationtask: a comparison with chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)and common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus).

74Culot, L., Muñoz Lazo, F. J., Huynen, M. C. and Heymann,E. W. Primary seed dispersal by tamarins into asecondary forest.Da Cunha, R. and Byrne, R. The screech complex of callsof immature black howler monkeys (Alouatta caraya).Dacier, A., De Luna, G., Fernandez-Duque, E. and DiFiore, A. Estimating population density of tit monkeys(Callicebus discolor) through playback calls.De Marco, A., Petit, O. and Visalberghi, E. Facial displaysin two capuchin species: Cebus capucinus and Cebusapella.Defler, T. R. and Bueno, M. L. Species or subspecies: therelationship of two Colombian Lagothrix taxa.DeLuycker, A. M. Dynamics of the social pair bond in theRio Mayo titi monkey (Callicebus oenanthe) in northernPeru.Di Fiore, A. Molecular assessment of dispersal patterns insympatric woolly and spider monkeys.Dindo, M. and Whiten, A. Copying fidelity in capuchinmonkeys (Cebus apella).Dunn, J., Cristobal-Azkarate, J. and Vea, J.B. Changes inforaging behavior of mantled howler monkeys (Alouattapalliata) in response to food availability and their effecton physiological health.Emile, N., Goncalves, I. and Barros, M. Object versuspicture recognition of a snake predator by captive blacktufted-ear marmosets.Eraso, T. M., Vignolo, A., Norscia, I. and Palagi, E. Adultplay in a family group of captive common marmosets(Callithrix jacchus).Falotico, T. and Ottoni, E. B. Aimed stone-throwing by femalesduring courtship in wild capuchin monkeys (Cebuslibidinosus).Farmer, H., Leaver, L. A. and Plowman, A. B. Comparisonsof behavioural patterns and vocalizations in pair-housedand family-housed captive howler monkeys (Alouattacaraya).Feistner, A. and Rabeson, P. Participatory ecological monitoringof biodiversity: implicating villages in primateconservation.Fernandez-Duque, E. and Juarez, C. Ecological demographicand behavioral aspects of natal dispersal in monogamousowl monkeys (Aotus azarai) of the argentinanChaco.Ferreira, R. G. and Jerusalinsky, L. Three stones for threeseeds: selective tool use in capuchins.Ferris, C., Meyer, J. and Harder, J. Gender differences incommon prefrontal function and chemistry in responseto ECSTASY: females are selectively vulnerable.Fogaca, M. D. F. and Izar, P. I. Selection of sleeping sites byCebus nigritus in Brazilian Atlantic forest.Freitas, C., Spironello, W. and Venticinque, E. Logs andlong-term survival: the impact of selective timber extractionon central Amazonia primate communities.Garber, P. A. and Porter, L. M. Exudate production and theecology of exudates feeding in Saguinus and Callimico.Gibson, K. N. Male mating tactics in spider monkeys:sneaking to compete.Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Ginther, A. J. Social strategies of fathers and adult son alloparentsin cooperatively breeding cottontop tamarins(Saguinus oedipus oedipus).Gonzalez-Martinez, J. and Kessler, M. Surgical sterilizationas a means of population control for free-ranging introducedprimate population in southwestern Puerto Rico.Gordo, M., Calleia, F. O., Rohe, F., Leite, J. F., Vasconcelos,S. A., Cardoso, G. L., Anjos, M. P., Venticinque,E. M., Farias, I. P., Hrbek, T. and Ferrari, S. F. Whensmall is dangerous: the conservation ecology of a naturallyrange-restricted primate, Saguinus bicolor, the Manausmarmoset.Gros-Louis, J. The function of white-faced capuchin vocalizationsdiffers from the signaler’s and recipient’sperspective.Guedes, D. and Young, R. Bibliometric analysis of Brazilianprimatology from 1976 to 2006.Guidorizzi, C. E., Kierulff, M. C. and Alvarez, M. R.Density, birth seasonality and infant mortality in goldenheadedlion tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysomelas) inhabitinga semi-deciduous forest fragment in Bahia, Brazil.Gunhold, T., Pesendorfer, M. B., Range, F., Schiel, N.,Souto, A. and Huber, L. Conformity of habit? Experimentswith multiple groups of captive and free-livingcommon marmoset (Callithrix jacchus).Hankerson, S. J. and Dietz, J. M. Comparison of homerange calculation methods: golden lion tamarins as a casestudy.Hattori, Y., Kuroshima, H. and Fujita, K. Cognitive backgroundof reciprocal altruism in tufted capuchin monkeys(Cebus apella).Heymann, E. W., Huck, M. and Loettker, P. Kinship andinfant care in a cooperatively breeding tamarin, Saguinusmystax.Hiramatsu, C., Melin, A. D., Aureli, F., Schaffner, C. M.,Vorobyev, M. and Kawamura, S. Effectiveness of chromaticand achromatic signals in fruit foraging of wildspider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi).Izar, P., Presotto, A. and Fogaca, M. D. Goal-directedmovements of black capuchin monkeys, Cebus nigritus,in Atlantic forest.Jack, K. M. and Fedigan, L. M. Explaining female dispersalin a female-philopatric species (Cebus capucinus).Kaneko, T. and Tomonaga, M. Utility of habituation-dishabituationprocedure for cognitive studies of new worldmonkeys: verification of looking time sensitivity and explorationof behavioural measures.Kaplan, G., Rogers, L. J., Chen, H. C. and Berger, Y. Ageingand vocal communication in common marmosets.Kawamura, S., Matsumoto, Y., Ozawa, N., Hiwatashi,T., Okabe, Y., Tsutsui, T., Hiramatsu, C., Melin, A. D.,Innan, H., Schaffner, C. M., Aureli, F. and Fedigan, L.M. Mutations creating novel spectral types of atelid L/Mopsin alleles and the natural selection acting to maintainallelic polymorphism of L/M opsin genes in wild populationsof new world monkeys.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 75King, Z., Sheller, C. and Jack, K. M. The effects of infantbirths on male-female relationships in white-faced capuchins(Cebus capucinus).Kyes, R. C., Iskandar, E., Onibala, J. O., Chalise, M. K.,Li, J. H., Feeroz, M. M., Aggimarangsee, N., Kakule, P.and Serio Silva, J. C. Global partnerships in primate conservationbiology: field training and outreach education.Lakshminarayanan, V. R. and Santos, L. R. Framing effectsand the endowment effect in capuchins.Lawrence, J. M. Using playback experiments to investigatepair bond function in brown titi monkeys (Callicebusbrunneus).Link, A., Aldana, A. M., de Luna, A.G., Morales-Jimenez,A. L. and Stevenson, P. R. Effects of habitat degradationon the behavioral ecology and grouping patterns ofbrown spider monkeys (Ateles hybridus) at Serrania de lasQuinchas, Colombia.Liu, Q., Fragaszy, D., Bril, D., Dietrich, G. and Hirata,S. Capuchin monkeys and chimpanzees crack nuts skillfully:biomechanical analyses.Lynch Alfaro, J. W. and Alfaro, M. E. Biological and culturalevolution in capuchin monkeys: mapping behaviouraltraditions onto a Cebus molecular phylogeny.Maldonado, A. M. and Bearder, S. K. Assessing the impactof hunting on harvest-sensitive primates within protectedareas and indigenous lands in the southern ColombianAmazon.Matthews, L. J. Field experiments of an extractive processingtask in wild white-faced capuchin monkeys (Cebusalbifrons).McCabe, G. M. and Joachim, L. The 21 st century male: acase of unexpected care-giving in an alpha male capuchin(Cebus capucinus).Melin, A. D., Fedigan, L. M., Kawamura, S. and Hiramatsu,C. Fig foraging by white-faced capuchin monkeys inCosta Rica: considering polymorphic color vision.Mendes, A. L. B., Barbalho, J. C., Ferreira, R. G. andAraujo, J. F. Understanding of apparatus for cognitivetest by common marmoset.Mendes, S. and Strier, K. Implications of female dispersalof managing the northern muriqui (Brachyteleshypoxanthus).Mendes, S. L., Cunha, A. A., Dias, L. G., Melo, F. R., Strier,K. B. and Talebi, M. Challenges facing the conservationof the muriquis in the Brazilian Atlantic forest.Menzel, C. R. and Fragaszy, D. M. Monkeys get the point:capuchins use lasers to select and rank distant rewards.Montague, M. J. The effects of colour vision on decoypredator recognition among wild squirrel monkeys (Saimirisciureus).Morales-Jimenez, A. L. The silvery brown tamarin (Saguinusleucopus) conservation program: two years of experience.Morimoto, Y. and Fujita, K. Capuchin monkeys (Cebusapella) regulate their own behaviour according to theconspecific’s emotional expression.Morris, N., Richardson, A., Bezerra, B. M., Schwitzer,C. and Jones, G. Behavioural and vocal repertoires ofcaptive grey-ledged night monkeys Aotus lemurinusgriseimembra.Moura, A. and Lee, P. Wild capuchins show sex differencesin tool use: energetic costs, sexual selection or socialtradition?Muniz, L., Perry, S., Manson, J. H., Gross-Louis, J., Gilkenson,H. and Vigilanr, L. Close kin availability withinwild groups of white-faced capuchins.Nishimura, A. Hierarchy in woolly monkeys, Lagothrix lagotricha,at La Macarena, Colombia.Novy, M. B., Mundy, N. I. and Caine, N. G. Trichromaticand dichromatic marmosets (Callithrix geoffroyi) maydiffer in food inspection strategies.O’Malley, R. C. and Fedigan, L. M. Social conventionsin Cebus and Pan: ‘Hand-sniffing’ and the ‘groomminghand-clasp’ compared.Ottoni, E. B., Mannu M. Diversity of stone tool use bywild capuchin monkeys (Cebus libidinosus) in Serra DaCapivara, Brazil.Pan, J., Fragaszy, D., Pickering, T. and Kennedy, E. H.Learning to make detours: the micro-development ofskilled navigation in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella).Pavelka, M. S. M. and Behie, A. M. Reduction and recoveryof a black howler population in response to a majorhurricane.Perez Flores, J. S. Behavior management programs: a toolto increase animal welfare levels of new world monkeysin captivity.Perez-Ruiz, A. L. and Mondragon-Ceballos, R. Allogroomingin free-ranging spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi).Perry, S. E. Measures of social learning in wild capuchinmonkeys.Phillips, K. A. and Sherwood, C. C. Cortical developmentin brown capuchin monkeys: a structural MRI study.Porter, L. M. and Garber, P. A. Limited dispersal and cooperativebreeding in Callimico goeldii.Poti, P. and Saporiti, M. Tufted capuchins can use configurationsof nearby landmarks to find food.Presotto, A. and Izar, P. Weather conditions affect travelingpatterns of black capped capuchins (Cebus nigritus)in atlantic forest.Priscila, C., Goncalver, I., Emile, N., Ziller, F., Barros, M.and Tomaz, C. Similar defense-related behaviors in captivemarmosets confronted with different types of potentialpredators.Rapaport, L. Food sharing, coforaging and scaffolding inwild golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia).Rebecchini, L., Schaffner, C. M., Auleri, F., Vick, L. andRamos-Fernandez, G. The impact of hurricane Emily onthe activity budget, diet and subgroup composition ofwild spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi yucatanensis).Resende, B. and Fragaszy, D. M. Development of nut-crackingbehavior in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)and comparison with chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes).Rodrigues, M. A. Nepotistic back-scratching: patterns ofgrooming among captive female spider monkeys.Rodríguez Luna, E., Cortés Ortíz, L., Shedden A. andSolórzano García B. Critical review of the CAMP and

76PHVA workshops as instruments for Neotropical primateconservation.Rogers, L. J. and Gordon, D. J. Hand preference, reactivityand social behavior in Callithrix jacchus.Rohe, F., da Silva-Jr, J. and Spironello, W. The diversityof central amazonian primates and its newest addition, anew tamarin, provisionally of genus Saguinus.Rudolf von Rohr, C. The goeldi’s monkey (Callimico goeldi)a callitrichid that breaks ranks.Rylands, A. B., Williamson, L., Hoffmann, M. and Savage,A. The IUCN rel list assessment for primates-2008:overviews of the results for Madagascar, Africa, Asia andNeotropics.Santorelli, C. J., Schaffner, C. M. and Aureli, F. Variationin fur rubbing in two populations of wild spider monkeys(Ateles geoffroyi).Savage, A., Thomas, L., Leighty, K., Soto, L., Causado, J.and Medina, F. Developing new techniques to estimatethe cotton-top tamarin (Saguinus oedipus) population inColombia.Schino, G., Di Giuseppe, F. and Visalberghi, E. Groomingreciprocation in Cebus apella.Schulte, M. H. C. Evolutionary approaches to understandinghuman-primate interactions: ecotourism and whitefacedcapuchin monkeys in Costa Rica.Shedden, A. and Rodríguez-Luna, E. Flor de Catemaco:intensive use and howler monkey (Alouatta palliata) habitatmaintainment.Siani, J. M. and Dietz, J. M. Using acoustic playback experimentsto assess infant-caregiver communication in wildgolden lion tamarins at Poc o Das Antas reserve, Brazil.Slater, K. Y., Schaffner, C. M. and Aureli, F. Relationshipquality among wild male spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyiyucatanensis).Smith, T. E., McCallister, J. M. and Elwood, R. Behaviouraland physiological reactivity to novelty across theCallitrichid primate family.Solorzano-García, B. and Rodríguez-Luna, E. Changes inthe conservation status of the primate populations andtheir habitat in a transect of Los Tuxtlas, biosphere reserve,Mexico.Sousa, M. B. C. and Pontes, M. C. Hormonal and behavioralprofile of breeding and non breeding common marmoset(Callithrix jacchus) free-ranging males.Spagnoletti, N., Izar, P. and Visalberghi, E. Effects of foodavailability on tool use of wild bearded capuchin monkey(Cebus libidinosus).Spehar, S., Mathewson, P. and Di Fiore, A. The male spidermonkey loud call: a means of mate attraction and matechoice?Spironello, W., Gordo, M., Noronha, M., Boyle, S., deFreitas, C., Bezerra, B. and Barnett, A. Priorities applicationsand monitoring: learning from the Amazon primateresearch experience.Steffens, T. S. and Pavelka, M. S. M. Determining the habitatfeatures associated with the distribution of the blackhowler monkey within Belize, Central America.Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008Stewart, L. E., Kaplan, G. and Rogers, L. J. Food calls ofcommon marmosets, Callithrix jacchus.Stojan Dolar, M. and Heymann, E. W. Comparison of vigilancebehavior in stationary and locomoting moustachedtamarins (Saguinus mystax) in Peruvian Amazonia.Strier, K. B. and Mendes, S. L. The muriqui project of Caratinga:research and conservation over 26 years.Svensson, M. S. and Bearder, S. K. Improving managementof nocturnal primates: Assessing the distributionand abundance of owl monkeys (Aotus zonalis) in AltoChagres, Panamá.Takimoto, A., Kuroshima, H. and Fujita, K. Are tuftedcapuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) sensitive to unequalfood share? An experimental analysis of food-choice foropponents.Talebi M.G., Lee P.C. Nutritional ecology of southernmuriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides) inhabiting the lastremnant of continuous Brazilian Atlantic forest.Tardif, S., Paulik, M., Bertram, R. and Power, M. Maternalobesity studies in marmoset: collaborations among reproduction,nutrition, and obesity researchers.Taubert, J. and Burke, D. A face recognition task: howspider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi) and humans match compositestimuli.Taylor, A. B., Vinyard, C. J. and White, L. E. Do Peripheralfeeding specializations extend to the central nervoussystem in new world monkeys?Teixeira, S. D, Tavares, A., Almeida, R., Tavares, M. C.,Martins, R., Goldolfi, L. and Pratesi, R. Possible presenceof sensitivity to gluten (celiac disease) among captive primatesof the subfamily Callitrichinae.Tiddi, B., Polizzi di Sorrentino, E., Aureli, F., Janson,C. and Schino, G. Interchange between grooming andtolerance among wild tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebusapella): combining experiments and observations.Truppa, V., Ciolfi, F., Spinozzi, G. and De Lillo, C. Therole of similarity between global and local orientationin visual perception in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebusapella).Turnock, S. E. and Slater, K. Y. The effect of environmentalenrichment on the locomotive feeding and social behaviorof spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi) in the ZoologicoNacional, Honduras.Valderrama, X., Robinson, J., Cane, M., Giannini, A. andMelnick, D. Enso-influenced demographic and geneticchanges in wedge-capped capuchins.Van Wolkenten, M., Brosnan, S. F. and de Waal, F. B. Responseto inequity in effort and reward in Brown capuchinmonkeys (Cebus apella).Verderane, M. and Izar, P. Female social relationships ofwild tool-user capuchin monkeys (Cebus libidinosus).Vinyard, C. J., Wall, C. E., Williams, S. H., de OliveiraMelo, L. C., Valenca-Montenegro, M. M., Valle, Y. B.M., Monteiro da Cruz, M. A. O., Lucas, P. W., Taylos,A. B. and Hylander, W. L. Evolutionary morphology oftree-gouging in marmosets.

Neotropical Primates 15(2), August 2008 77Visalberghi, E. and Spagnoletti, N. Factors affecting successin the use of hammers and anvils to crack open nutsin wild bearded capuchins.Waga, I. C., Tomaz, C. and Tavares M. C. H. Spatial andnon-spatial relational memory in capuchin monkeys(Cebus apella).Welker, B. J. Howler monkey leaf choice: protein-to-fiberratio revisited.Wheeler, B. C. False alarm: do tufted capuchin monkeys(Cebus apella) use anti-predator calls to usurp resourcesfrom conspecifics?Youlatos, D. and Gasc, J. P. Gait and kinematics of arborealquadrupedal walk of free-ranging red howlers (Alouattaseniculus) in French Guiana.Young, R. J., Froes, A. P., Torquetti, C. G., Teixeira, B. andTalamoni, S. A. Factors influencing the distribution ofurban marmosets.Ziegler, T. E. and Snowdon, C. T. Chemical communicationmaintains the cooperative breeding social system intwo platyrrhine species, Callithrix jacchus and Saguinusoedipus.MeetingsIV Congreso Mexicano de Primatología. 24–26 de Junio,Villahermosa, Tabasco. La Asociación Mexicana de PrimatologíaA.C. y la Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabascoconvocan. Para mayor información visite: http://www.tierradeideas.com/amp/The 32nd Meeting of the American Society of Primatologists.September 18–21, Bahia Resort Hotel, SanDiego, California, USA. Tentative deadline for abstracts iscurrently March, 2009. For further information check theweb site: www.asp.org/asp2009/index.htm2010The 23 rd congress of the International PrimatologicalSociety. September 12–18, Kyoto University, Japan. Thetheme of the conference will be ‘Quest for Coexistencewith Nonhuman Primates.’ In line with IPS policy, thecommittee welcomes suggestions for symposia on any ofthe disciplines of primatology. The Symposium submissiondeadline is October 15 th , 2009. The presentation submissiondeadline is January 15 th , 2010. For more informationgo to www.ips2010.jp/.2009The 11 th meeting of the German Society of Primatology.February 24–26, University of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover,Germany. For more information visit the web site:www.gfp2009.deThe XIX meeting of the Italian Primatological Society.April 1–3, Asti, Italy. The topic of the meeting will be“The primates 200 years after the birth of Darwin, History,Evolution, Ethology and Conservation¨. For moreinformation go to: www-1.unipv.it/webbio/api/api.htmThe 3 rd Congress of the European Federation for Primatology.August 12–15, Irchel campus of the Universityof Zürich, Switzerland. The EFP is a federation of all nationalprimatological societies and groups in Europe. Thebiennial meetings strive to bring together primatologistsand biological anthropologists from all over Europe to encourageinterdisciplinary and international exchanges. Theregistration and abstract submission deadline is April 15 th ,2009. For more information visit the web site: www.aim.uzh.ch/EFP.html

Marmosets and Tamarins Pocket Identification GuideMail and Fax Order FormMarmosets and Tamarins Pocket Identification Guide by Anthony B. Rylands, Russell A.Mittermeier, Adelmar F. Coimbra-Filho, Eckhard W. Heymann, Stella de la Torre, José de Sousae Silva Jr., M. Cecília Martins Kierulff, Maurício de A. Noronha and Fábio Röhe.ISBN: 978-1-934151-20-4. First Edition.Price: $7.95 (includes UPS Ground shipping within the continental United States)For orders requiring faster service than UPS Ground, you will be responsible for paying allshipping costs.Please call the phone number listed below for: overnight deliveries, wholesale orders, andinternational orders.Please complete the following form, print it out and mail or fax to:Jill LucenaConservation International2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500Arlington, VA 22202 USATel (703) 341-2536Fax (703) 553-4817Email: j.lucena@conservation.orgFirst NameLast NameCompany NameMailing Address City State Zip CodeTelephoneFaxE-Mail AddressOrder Form should include credit card information or be sent along with check or moneyorder, in U.S. dollars, made payable to Conservation International. Please allow 2-3weeks for delivery.Quantity _______ x $7.95 eachTotal: _________________Payment Enclosed (check or money order in US $ only)Charge my credit card: _____VISA _____MastercardName (as it appears on card)_______________________________Card Number _________________________________Expiration Date ________________________________Signature _____________________________________

Notes to ContributorsScopeThe journal/newsletter aims to provide a basis for conservationinformation relating to the primates of the Neotropics. Wewelcome texts on any aspect of primate conservation, includingarticles, thesis abstracts, news items, recent events, recentpublications, primatological society information and suchlike.SubmissionsPlease send all English and Spanish contributions to: ErwinPalacios, Conservación Internacional – Colombia, Carrera 13# 71-41 Bogotá D.C., Colombia, Tel: (571) 345-2852/54,Fax: (571) 345-2852/54, e-mail: , and all Portuguese contributions to: Júlio César Bicca-Marques, Departamento de Biodiversidade e Ecologia, PontifíciaUniversidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Av. Ipiranga, 6681Prédio 12A, Porto Alegre, RS 90619-900, Brasil, Tel: (55) (51)3320-3545 ext. 4742, Fax: (55) (51) 3320-3612, e-mail: .ContributionsManuscripts may be in English, Spanish or Portuguese, andshould be double-spaced and accompanied by the text on CDfor PC compatible text-editors (MS-Word, WordPerfect, Excel,and Access), and/or e-mailed to (English, Spanish) or (Portuguese). Hardcopies should be supplied for all figures (illustrations and maps)and tables. The full name and address for each author should beincluded. Please avoid abbreviations and acronyms without thename in full. Authors whose first language is not English shouldplease have their English manuscripts carefully reviewed by a nativeEnglish speaker.Articles. Each issue of Neotropical Primates will include up to threefull articles, limited to the following topics: Taxonomy, Systematics,Genetics (when relevant for systematics and conservation), Biogeography,Ecology and Conservation. Text for full articles should betypewritten, double-spaced with no less than 12 cpi font (preferablyTimes New Roman) and 3-cm margins throughout, and should notexceed 25 pages in length (including references). Please include anabstract in the same language as the rest of the text (English, Spanishor Portuguese) and (optional) one in Portuguese or Spanish (ifthe text is written in English) or English (if the text is written inSpanish or Portuguese). Tables and illustrations should be limitedto six, except in cases where they are fundamental for the text (asin species descriptions, for example). Full articles will be sent outfor peer-review. For articles that include protein or nucleic acid sequences,authors must deposit data in a publicly available databasesuch as GenBank/EMBL/DNA Data Bank of Japan, Brookhaven,or Swiss-Prot, and provide an accession number for inclusion in thepublished paper.Short articles. These manuscripts are usually reviewed only bythe editors. A broader range of topics is encouraged, includingsuch as behavioral research, in the interests of informing on generalresearch activities that contribute to our understanding of platyrrhines.We encourage reports on projects and conservation andresearch programs (who, what, where, when, why, etc.) and mostparticularly information on geographical distributions, locality records,and protected areas and the primates that occur in them. Textshould be typewritten, double-spaced with no less than 12 cpi (preferablyTimes New Roman) font and 3-cm margins throughout, andshould not exceed 12 pages in length (including references).Figures and maps. Articles may include small black-andwhitephotographs, high-quality figures, and high-quality maps.(Resolution: 300 dpi. Column widths: one-column = 8-cm wide;two-columns = 17-cm wide). Please keep these to a minimum. Westress the importance of providing maps that are publishable.Tables. Tables should be double-spaced, using font size 10, andprepared with MS Word. Each table should have a brief title.News items. Please send us information on projects, field sites,courses, Thesis or Dissertations recently defended, recent publications,awards, events, activities of Primate Societies, etc.References. Examples of house style may be found throughoutthis journal. In-text citations should be first ordered chronologicallyand then in alphabetical order. For example, “…(Fritz, 1970; Albert,1980, 2004; Oates, 1981; Roberts, 2000; Smith, 2000; Albertet al., 2001)…”In the list of references, the title of the article, name of thejournal, and editorial should be written in the same languageas they were published. All conjunctions and prepositions (i.e.,“and”, “In”) should be written in the same language as rest of themanuscript (i.e., “y” or “e”, “En” or “Em”). This also applies forother text in references (such as “PhD thesis”, “accessed” – seebelow). Please refer to these examples when listing references:Journal articleStallings, J. D. and Mittermeier, R. A. 1983. The black-tailedmarmoset (Callithrix argentata melanura) recorded from Paraguay.Am. J. Primatol. 4: 159–163.Chapter in bookBrockelman, W. Y. and Ali, R. 1987. Methods of surveying andsampling forest primate populations. In: Primate Conservation inthe Tropical Rain Forest, C. W. Marsh and R. A. Mittermeier (eds.),pp.23–62. Alan R. Liss, New York.BookNapier, P. H. 1976. Catalogue of Primates in the British Museum(Natural History). Part 1: Families Callitrichidae and Cebidae.British Museum (Natural History), London.Thesis/DissertationWallace, R. B. 1998. The behavioural ecology of black spidermonkeys in north-eastern Bolivia. Doctoral thesis, University ofLiverpool, Liverpool, UK.ReportMuckenhirn, N. A., Mortensen, B. K., Vessey, S., Fraser, C. E.O. and Singh, B. 1975. Report on a primate survey in Guyana.Unpublished report, Pan American Health Organization,Washington, DC.WebsiteUNESCO. 2005. UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Programme.United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation(UNESCO), Paris. Website: http://www.unesco.org/mab/index.htm. Accessed 25 April 2005. (“Acessada em 25 de abril de 2005”and “Consultado el 25 de abril de 2005” for articles in Portugueseand Spanish respectively).For references in Portuguese and Spanish:“and” changes to “e” and “y” for articles in Portuguese and Spanishrespectively.

Neotropical PrimatesA Journal and Newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist GroupVol. 15(2), August 2008ContentsEditorial..................................................................................................................................................................................39ArticlesSeed Predation of Mabea fistulifera (Euphorbiaceae) by Northern Muriquis (Brachyteles hypoxanthus)Ítalo M. C. Mourthé, Karen B. Strier and Jean P. Boubli.................................................................................................................40Short ArticlesHabitat Characterization and Population Density of Brown Spider Monkeys (Ateles hybridus) in Magdalena Valley, ColombiaAna María Aldana, Marta Beltrán, Johanna Torres-Neira and Pablo R. Stevenson............................................................................46Primatas da RPPN Gargaú, Paraíba, BrasilMarcos de Souza Fialho and Gregório Fernandes Gonçalves.............................................................................................................50Distribuição e Variação na Pelagem de Callicebus coimbrai (Primates, Pitheciidae) nos Estadosde Sergipe e Bahia, BrasilMarcelo Cardoso de Sousa, Sidnei Sampaio dos Santos and Mariana Coelho Marques Valente...........................................................54Occasional Field Observations of the Predation on Mice, Dove and Ants by Black-Tufted-Ear Marmosets(Callithrix penicillata)Ita de O. Silva, Adriano B. B. Alvarenga and Vanner Boere.............................................................................................................59Observation of Black-Capped Capuchins (Cebus apella) Feeding on an Owl Monkey (Aotus brumbacki)in the Colombian LlanosXyomara Carretero-Pinzón, Thomas R. Defler and Stephen F. Ferrari...............................................................................................62Densidad Poblacional y Tamaño de Grupo de Saguinus leucopus en Parches de Bosque en el Departamentode Caldas, ColombiaNéstor Roncancio Duque, William Rojas Vinasco and Jaime Vicente Estévez Varón............................................................................63Expansão da Distribuição Geográfica de Callicebus bernhardi a Oeste do Rio Ji-Paraná, Estado de Rondônia,BrasilGuilherme Reis Monçâo, Valquiria Selhorst and José Alexandre Rodrigues Soares-filho.......................................................................67News .........................................................................................................................................................................................68Recent Publications ...............................................................................................................................................................69Meetings ...................................................................................................................................................................................77

Neotropical Primates - Primate Specialist Group

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?