Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:18:54.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploitation of Mabea fistulifera nectar by marmosets (Callithrix flaviceps) and muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides) in south-east Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Stephen F. Ferrari  and
Karen B. Strier
Stephen F. Ferrari
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University College London, UK
Karen B. Strier*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin, 1180 Observatory Drive, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA
*
2 Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study reports on the exploitation of the nectar of Mabea fistulifera (Euphorbiaceae) by two platyrrhine primate species (Brachyteles arachnoides and Callithrix flaviceps) in the Atlantic Forest of south-east Brazil. Nectar-feeding by both primates was observed between late April and May, during which a peak in the floristic activity of M. fistulifera was recorded, in terms of both the number of trees flowering and the number of flowers available on each tree. Phenological records indicate, by contrast, that edible fruit was relatively scarce during this period, the early dry season at the study site. On the days when nectar was consumed, it accounted for 25% of records of plant feeding for B. arachnoides and 29% for C. flaviceps, although the former species was observed nectar feeding over a much longer period. The evidence indicates that M. fistulifera is a valuable, but not essential resource for both primates at a time of year when edible fruit is relatively difficult to obtain. M. fistulifera, in turn, can be seen as an opportunistic plant whose floral characteristics permit pollination by a wide range of volant and non-volant vertebrates, including primates.

Keywords

Brachyteles arachnoidesBrazilCallithrix flavicepsMabea fistuliferanectar-feedingpollinationflowering phenology
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Tropical Ecology , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , August 1992 , pp. 225 - 239
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

LITERATURE CITED

Altmann, J. 1974. Observational study of behaviour: Sampling methods. Behaviour 49:227–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ayres, J. M. C. 1989. Comparative feeding ecology of the uakari and bearded saki, Cacajao and Chiropotes. Journal of Human Evolution 18:697–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, H. G. 1975. Sugar concentrations in nectars from hummingbird flowers. Biotropica 7:37–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bearder, S. K. & Martin, R. D. 1980. Acacia gum and its use by bushbabies, Galago senegalensis (Primates: Lorisidae). International Journal of Primatology 1:103–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonvicino, C. R. 1987. Observações sobre a ecologia e o comportamento de Alouatta belzebul (Primates: Cebidae) na mala atlântica. Unpublished MSc dissertation, Federal University of Paraîba.Google Scholar
Buchanan-Smith, H. M. 1991. A field study of the red-bellied tamarin, Saguinus I. labiatus, in Bolivia. International Journal of Primatology 12:259–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coimbra-Filho, A. F. & Mittermeier, R. A. 1977. Tree-gouging, exudate eating and the ‘shorttusked’ condition in Callithrix and Cebuella. Pp. 105–115 in Kleiman, D. G. (ed.). The biology and conservation of the Callitrichidae. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Coimbra-Filho, A. F., Rocha, N. Da C. & Pissinatti, A. 1980. Morfofisiologia do ceco e sua corrclação com o tipo odontológico em Callitrichidae (Platyrrhini, Primates). Revista Brasileira de Biologia 41:141–147.Google Scholar
Ferrari, S. F. 1988. The behaviour and ecology of the buffy-headed marmoset, Callithrix flaviceps (O. Thomas, 1903). Unpublished PhD thesis, University College London.Google Scholar
Ferrari, S. F. & Lopes Ferrari, M. A. 1989. A re-evaluation of the social organisation of the Callitrichidae, with reference to the ecological differences between genera. Folia Primatologica 52:132–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrari, S. F. & Martins, E. S. In press. Gummivory and gut morphology in two sympatric callitrichids (Callithrix emiliae and Saguinus fuscicollis weddelli) from western Brazilian Amazonia. American Journal of Physical Anthropology.Google Scholar
Freese, C. 1983. Cebus capucinus. Pp. 458–460 in Janzen, D. H. (ed.). Costa Rican Natural History. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Freese, C. & Oppenheimer, J. R. 1981. The capuchin monkeys, genus Cebus. Pp. 331–390 in Coimbra-Filho, A. F. & Mittermeier, R. A. (eds.). Ecology and Behaviour of Neotropical primates. Academia Brasileira de Ciências, Rio de Janeiro. Vol. 1.Google Scholar
Garber, P. A. 1988. Foraging decisions during nectar feeding by tamarin monkeys (Saguinus mystax and Saguinus fuscicollis, Callitrichidae, Primates) in Amazonian Peru. Biotropica 20:100–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garber, P. A. & Teaford, M. F. 1986. Body weights in mixed species troops of Saguinus mystax mystax and Saguinus fuscicollis nigrifrons in Amazonian Peru. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 71:331–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Janson, C. H., Terborgh, J. & Emmons, L. H. 1981. Non-flying mammals as pollinating agents in the Amazonian forest. Biotropica 13 (supplement): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julien-Laferrière, D. & Atramentowicz, M. 1990. Feeding and reproduction of three didelphid marsupials in two neotropical forests (French Guiana). Biotropica 22:404–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacher, T. E. Jr, Boucharet Da Fonseca, G. A., Alves, C. & Magalhães Castro, B. 1984. Parasitism of trees by marmosets in a central Brazilian gallery forest. Biotropica 16:202–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leigh, E. G. & Windsor, D. M. 1982. Forest production and regulation of primary consumers on Barro Colorado Island. Pp. 111–112 in Leigh, E. G., Rand, A. S. & Windsor, D. M. (eds). The ecology of a tropical forest: seasonal rhythms and long-term changes. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
Lemos De Sá, R. M. 1988. Situação de uma população de mono-carvoeiro Braehyteles arachnoides em fragmento de mata atlântica (MG), e implieações para sua eonservação. Unpublished MSc dissertation, University of Brasîlia.Google Scholar
Milton, K. 1984. Habitat, diet, and activity patterns of free-ranging woolly spider monkeys (Brachyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroyi 1806). International Journal of Primatology 5:491–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nash, L. T. 1986. Dietary, behavioural and morphological aspects of gummivory in primates. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 29:113–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council. 1981. Techniques for the study of primate population ecology. National Academy Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Nishimura, A., Da Fonseca, G. A. B., Mettermeier, R. A., Young, A. L., Strier, K. B. & Valle, C. M. C. 1988. The Muriqui, genus Braehyteles. Pp. 577–610 in Mittermeier, R. A., Rylands, A. B., Coimbra-Filho, A. F. & da Fonseca, G. A. B. (eds). Ecology and behaviour of neotropical primates. World Wildlife Fund – U.S., Washington, DC, Vol. 2.Google Scholar
Neville, M. K., Glander, K. E., Braza, F. & Rylands, R. A. 1988. The howling monkeys, genus Alouatta. Pp. 349–453 in Mittermeier, R. A., Rylands, A. B., Coimbra-Filho, A. F. & da Fonseca, G. A. B. (eds). Ecology and behaviour of neotropical primates. World Wildlife Fund – US, Washington DC, Vol. 2.Google Scholar
Oppenheimer, J. R. 1977. Forest structure and its relation to activity of the capuchin monkey (Cebus). Pp. 74–84 in Prasad, M. R. N. & Kumar, T. C. A. (eds). Use of non-human primates in biomedical research. Indian National Science Academy, New Delhi.Google Scholar
Peres, C. A. S. 1986. Costs and benefits of territorial defense in golden lion lamarins. Leontopithecus rosalia. Unpublished MSc dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Peres, C. A. S. 1991. Ecology of mixed-species groups of tamarins in Amazonian terra firme forests. Primate Eye 44:5–6.Google Scholar
Prance, G. T. 1980. A note on the probable pollination of Combretum by Cebus monkeys. Biotropica 12:239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roosmalen, M. G. M. Van 1985. Habitat preferences, diet, feeding strategy and social organization of the black spider monkey (Ateles paniscus paniscus Linnaeus 1758) in Surinam. Acta Amazonica 15 (supplement).Google Scholar
Rosenberger, A. L. & Coimbra-Filho, A. F. 1984. Morphology, taxonomic status and affinities of the lion tamarins, Leontopithecus (Callitrichinae, Cebidae). Folia Primatologica 42:149–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rourke, J. & Wiens, D. 1977. Convergent floral evolution in South African and Australian Proteaceae and its possible bearing on pollination by nonflying mammals. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 64:1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rylands, A. B. 1982. The behaviour and ecology of three species of marmosets and tamarins (Callitrichidae, Primates) in Brazil. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rylands, A. B. 1989. Sympatric Brazilian callitrichids: The black tufted-ear marmoset, Callithrix kuhli, and the golden-headed lion tamarin, Leontopithecus chrysomelas. Journal of Human Evolution 18:679–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soini, P. 1987. Ecology of the saddle-back tamarin Saguinus juscicollis illigeri on the Río Pacaya, northeastern Peru. Folia Primatologica 49:16–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, M. F. & Rylands, A. B. 1988. The marmosets, genus Callithrix. Pp. 131–222 in Mittermeier, R. A., Rylands, A. B., Coimbra-Filho, A. F. & da Fonseca, G. A. B. (eds). Ecology and behaviour of neotropical primates. World Wildlife Fund – US, Washington DC, Vol. 2.Google Scholar
Strier, K. B. 1986. The behaviour and ecology of the woolly spider monkey, or muriqui (Braehyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroyi 1806). Unpublished PhD thesis, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Strier, K. B. 1987a. Activity budgets of woolly spider monkeys or muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides). American Journal of Primatology 13:385–395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strier, K. B. 1987b. Ranging behaviour of woolly spider monkeys. International Journal of Primatology 8:575–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strier, K. B. 1989. Effects of patch size on grouping associations of muriquis. Folia Primatologica 52:70–77.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strier, K. B. 1991. Diet in one group of woolly spider monkeys, or muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides). American Journal of Primatology 23:113–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sussman, R. W. & Raven, P. H. 1978. Pollination by lemurs and marsupials: an archaic revolutionary system. Science 200:731–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Terborgh, J. 1983. Five New World primates: a study in comparative ecology. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Terborgh, J. & Stern, M. 1987. The surreptitious life of the saddle-back tamarin. American Scientist 75:260–269.Google Scholar
Torres De Assumpção, C. 1981. Cebus apella and Brachyteles arachnoides (Cebidae) as potential pollinators of Mabea fistulifera (Euphorbiaceac). Journal of Mammalogy 62:386–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoneda, M. 1984. Ecological study of the saddle backed tamarin (Saguinus fuscicollis) in northern Bolivia. Primates 25:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar