Search

Among mammals, the order Primates is exceptional in having a high taxonomic richness in which the taxa are arboreal, semiterrestrial, or terrestrial. Although habitual terrestriality is pervasive among the apes and African and Asian monkeys (catarrhines), it is largely absent among monkeys of the Americas (platyrrhines), as well as galagos, lemurs, and lorises (strepsirrhines), which are mostly arboreal. Numerous ecological drivers and species-specific factors are suggested to set the conditions for an evolutionary shift from arboreality to terrestriality, and current environmental conditions may provide analogous scenarios to those transitional periods. Therefore, we investigated predominantly arboreal, diurnal primate genera from the Americas and Madagascar that lack fully terrestrial taxa, to determine whether ecological drivers (habitat canopy cover, predation risk, maximum temperature, precipitation, primate species richness, human population density, and distance to roads) or species-specific traits (body mass, group size, and degree of frugivory) associate with increased terrestriality. We collated 150,961 observation hours across 2,227 months from 47 species at 20 sites in Madagascar and 48 sites in the Americas. Multiple factors were associated with ground use in these otherwise arboreal species, including increased temperature, a decrease in canopy cover, a dietary shift away from frugivory, and larger group size. These factors mostly explain intraspecific differences in terrestriality. As humanity modifies habitats and causes climate change, our results suggest that species already inhabiting hot, sparsely canopied sites, and exhibiting more generalized diets, are more likely to shift toward greater ground use.

Landscape genetics is an emerging field that integrates population genetics, landscape ecology, and spatial statistics to investigate how geographical and environmental features and evolutionary processes such as gene flow, genetic drift, and selection structure genetic variation at both the population and individual levels, with implications for ecology, evolution, and conservation biology. Despite being particularly well suited for primatologists, this method is currently underutilized. Here, we synthesize the current state of research on landscape genetics in primates. We begin by outlining how landscape genetics has been used to disentangle the drivers of diversity, followed by a review of how landscape genetic methods have been applied to primates. This is followed by a section highlighting special considerations when applying the methods to primates, and a practical guide to facilitate further landscape genetics studies using both existing and de novo datasets. We conclude by exploring future avenues of inquiry that could be facilitated by recent developments as well as underdeveloped applications of landscape genetics to primates., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Documenting the natural diversity of eukaryotic organisms in the nonhuman primate (NHP) gut is important for understanding the evolution of the mammalian gut microbiome, its role in digestion, health and disease, and the consequences of anthropogenic change on primate biology and conservation. Despite the ecological significance of gut-associated eukaryotes, little is known about the factors that influence their assembly and diversity in mammals. In this study, we used an 18S rRNA gene fragment metabarcoding approach to assess the eukaryotic assemblage of 62 individuals representing 16 NHP species. We find that cercopithecoids, and especially the cercopithecines, have substantially higher alpha diversity than other NHP groups. Gut-associated protists and nematodes are widespread among NHPs, consistent with their ancient association with NHP hosts. However, we do not find a consistent signal of phylosymbiosis or host-species specificity. Rather, gut eukaryotes are only weakly structured by primate phylogeny with minimal signal from diet, in contrast to previous reports of NHP gut bacteria. The results of this study indicate that gut-associated eukaryotes offer different information than gut-associated bacteria and add to our understanding of the structure of the gut microbiome.

Objectives: Extant primate crania represent a small subset of primate crania that have existed. The main objective here is to examine how the inclusion of fossil crania changes our understanding of primate cranial diversity relative to analyses of extant primates. We hypothesize that fossil taxa will change the major axes of cranial shape, occupy new areas of morphospace, change the relative diversity of major primate clades, and fill in notable gaps separating major primate taxa/clades., Materials and Methods: Eighteen 3D landmarks were collected on 157 extant and fossil crania representing 90 genera. Data were subjected to a Generalized Procrustes Analysis then principal components analysis. Relative diversity between clades was assessed using an F-statistic., Results: Fossil taxa do not significantly alter major axes of cranial shape, but they do occupy unique areas of morphospace, change the relative diversity between clades, and fill in notable gaps in primate cranial evolution. Strepsirrhines remain significantly less diverse than anthropoids. Fossil hominins fill the gap in cranial morphospace between extant great apes and modern humans., Discussion: The morphospace outlined by living primates largely includes that occupied by fossil taxa, suggesting that the cranial diversity of living primates generally encompasses the total diversity that has evolved in this Order. The evolution of the anthropoid cranium was a significant event allowing anthropoids to achieve significantly greater cranial diversity compared to strepsirrhines. Fossil taxa fill in notable gaps within and between clades, highlighting their transitional nature and eliminating the appearance of large morphological distances between extant taxa, particularly in the case of extant hominids., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Mammals chew more rhythmically than lepidosaurs. The research presented here evaluated possible reasons for this difference in relation to differences between lepidosaurs and mammals in sensorimotor systems. Variance in the absolute and relative durations of the phases of the gape cycle was calculated from kinematic data from four species of primates and eight species of lepidosaurs. The primates exhibit less variance in the duration of the gape cycle than in the durations of the four phases making up the gape cycle. This suggests that increases in the durations of some gape cycle phases are accompanied by decreases in others. Similar effects are much less pronounced in the lepidosaurs. In addition, the primates show isometric changes in gape cycle phase durations, i.e. the relative durations of the phases of the gape cycle change little with increasing cycle time. In contrast, in the lepidosaurs variance in total gape cycle duration is associated with increases in the proportion of the cycle made up by the slow open phase. We hypothesize that in mammals the central nervous system includes a representation of the optimal chew cycle duration maintained using afferent feedback about the ongoing state of the chew cycle. The differences between lepidosaurs and primates do not lie in the nature of the sensory information collected and its feedback to the feeding system, but rather the processing of that information by the CNS and its use feed-forward for modulating jaw movements and gape cycle phase durations during chewing.