4th-9th August, 2002, Beijing, China Organized by: Mammalogical Society of China Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences Sponsored by Chinese Academy of Sciences National Natural Science Foundation of China State Forestry Administration CONTENTS Keynote Speeches 1 Symposium #01 Priorities for primate conservation in the first decade of the 21st century 7 Symposium #02 Evolution, systematics, phylogeny and functional anatomy of Asia colobines l4 Symposium #03 Models of speciation in Sulawesi primates 19 Symposium #04 Mating, birth and parental care strategies of nocturnal prosimians 26 Symposium #05 Recent progress in the research on monkey B virus and related primate a -herpesvirus 35 Symposium #06 Hemosiderosis and lemurs- incidence, diagnosis, genetics and dietary prevention 41 Symposium #07 Primate molecular systematic and conservation genetics 45 Symposium #08 Primate origins of culture: Recent progress in the wild and in the laboratory 51 Symposium #09 Bi-directional pathogen transmission between humans and wild nonhuman primates: Implications for primate conservation and human health 57 Symposium #10 Primates in zoos: Integrating welfare and conservation 62 Symposium #11 Ecology, behavior, and conservation biology on Chinese primates 66 Symposium #12 Developing successful conservation programs for primates: Field initiatives, education programs, and influencing decision makers 76 Symposium #13 Indonesian primate conservation: Status, distribution, and likely future 81 Symposium #14 Asian primates in crisis and the need to improve ethical and welfare standards to sustain them in captivity 86 Symposium #15 Sex differences in marmosets and tamarins 89 Symposium #16 Rehabilitation and reintroduction: a possible tool for the conservation of Apes 95 Symposium # 17 Canopy biology, tree climbing strategies and primate ecology l01 Symposium # 18 Molecular ecology and social structure 106 Symposium # 19 Gibbon diversity and conservation 112 Symposium #20 The global trade in primates 135 Symposium #21 Behavioral and cognitive development of infant chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): Overview of the research project in the primate research institute, Kyoto University 140 Symposium #22 Gorillas in the 21st century: Conservation status, challenges and solutions 146 Symposium #23 Food acceptance, diet selection and feeding techniques: The role of social influences on individual learning 152 Symposium #24 Inter-modal equivalence of visual and acoustical information in primates in relation to the emergence of language l57 Symposium #25 Primates in peril: Captive primates in Situ 162 Symposium #26 Raising the standards of caring for apes 169 Symposium #27 Human and nonhuman primate interconnections: Evolution, commensualism and conflict 174 Symposium #28 Training Primates 180 Symposium #29 Breeding and trade of nonhuman primates in China 186 Workshop #03 World heritage species status for the great apes 192 Oral Session #01 Ecology and Behavior 197 Oral Session #02 Cognition and Neurobiology 234 Oral Session #03 Conservation 249 Oral Session #04 Development, Reproduction and Captive Care 274 Oral Session #05 Systematic, Anatomy, Evolution and Genetics 295 Poster Session #01 Ecology and Behavior 312 Poster Session #02 Cognition and Neurobiology 330 Poster Session #03 Conservation 338 Poster Session #04 Development, Reproduction and Captive Care 347 Poster Session #05 Systematic, Anatomy, Evolution and Genetics 357 Author Index 365 ABSTRACTS-KEYNOTE SPEECHES 0001 Fossil Humankind and Higher Non-Human Hominoidea of China Xinzhi Wu Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044, China, e-mail: wuxzdq@mx.cei.gov.cn Key Words: Human fossil, non-human Primates, China In China, there are more than 70 sites, which have yielded human fossils. They belong to Homo s. erectus and Homo s. sapiens. Among the human fossils found in China many common morphological features and morphological mosaic between the two taxa have been identified. These indicate the continuity of human evolution in China. That a few features typically existing in Neanderthal lineage are seen in a few fossils of China suggest a small amount of gene flow between China and the Western World. On the basis of the evidence supporting continuity and geneflow a hypothesis entitled Continuity with Hybridization has been proposed for the human evolution of China. This hypothesis is also supported by the Paleolithic data of China, which indicate a continuous development in China with a small amount of cultural exchange with the West. This hypothesis supports the Multiregional Evolution Hypothesis in the debate of modern human origins. The earliest human fossils of China are probably the incisors from Yuanmou, Yunnan Province. Earliest skull is that from Gongwangling, Shaanxi Province. Both sites are dated by faunal correlation as of Early Pleistocene and by paleomagnetism as 1.7 Mya and 1.15 Mya respectively. The indirect evidence, the stone artifacts indicate the possible existing of humans in China earlier than 2 million years ago. Many Neogene and early Pleistocene ape fossils have been found in China. Although some of them such as Gigantopithecus, Lufengpithecus and a mandibular fragment from Longgupo have been claimed to be the ancestors of fossils humans of China by a few scholars, but these apes are most probably aberrant branches out of hominid lineage. 0002 Brains in Primates, Especially Chimpanzees and Humans Charles E. Oxnard School of Anatomy and Human Biology, University of Western Australia, Australia, 6009, E-mail: coxnard@cyllene.uwa.edu.au Modern neurobiological methods, especially the various non-invasive functional imaging techniques, have greatly improved our understanding of the relationships between structure and function in the brain. Powerful though they are, however, these methods cannot easily be applied to the wide diversity of animals required for evolutionary studies. Thus, brain investigations of mammals in an evolutionary context have mainly been based upon much simpler data: the individual sizes of bodies, brains and major brain components. Two of the most important contributors over many years were Stephan and Jerison. Their data (and the data of others) have been primarily analyzed using simple statistical methods. Their results have emphasized the enormously close relationship with the sizes of both brains and bodies. Such studies have given rise to concepts like axes of encephalization and hominization. Recently, however, many brain-part variables have been studied together using multivariate statistical methods (morphometrics) that allow for interrelationships among variables. Such studies have generally confirmed the already known linear relationship (using logged data) of brain-part sizes with overall brain (and body) size (eg Finlay and Darlington, Science, 1995). The results imply that mammalian brain development is rigorously constrained. Perhaps the simplest way to evolve a large cerebellum (bats) or a large neo-cortex (primates) is selection for a larger brain. Even newer morphometric investigations, (eg Barton and Harvey, Nature, 2000; Clark, Mitra and Wang, Nature, 2001), confirm this size effect and find, additionally, some differences in brain organization associated with phylogeny. These authors therefore suggest that, in addition to strong developmental constraints, there is a degree of mosaicism involved in brain evolution. Finally, de Winter (1997) and de Winter and Oxnard (Nature, 2001) also recognized brain organizational features related to overall brain size and to higher phylogenetic relationships, and have revealed yet further information: the clearest distinctions of all in these data are between brain organizations and animal lifestyles. For instance, fish eating bats, irrespective of phylogenetic placement, show similar brain organization; so too, do burrowing insectivores, again irrespective of evolutionary propinquity. Against this general mammalian pattern it is possible to view the relationships of primate brains. Here, too, the clearest distinctions are among life-style groups. Especially interesting is the nature of the similarities and differences between humans and chimpanzees. These two species are enormously close (98.6%) in terms of their DNA, and quite different from Old World monkeys. Yet in terms of brain morphometrics, the separation between humans and chimpanzees is four times greater than the spread containing chimpanzees and all other Old World species. This neurometric difference fits well with new gene expression differences between humans and chimpanzees. It also fits well with the cognitive differences between the two species. The primary distinctions between humans and chimpanzees may be due to new evolutionary mechanisms in human brains that have not applied to other primates. The mammalian background to this work was largely carried out by W. de Winter first published in his 1997 doctoral thesis. The work is supported by the Australian Research Council and the I3K Leverhulme Trust. 0003 Primate Conservation in the First Decade of the 21st Century Russell A. Mittermeier Conservation International, 1919 M Street, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036, USA, e-mail: r.mittermeier@conservation.org. Over the past two decades, wild primates have declined dramatically with the ongoing and rapid devastation of their forests, through logging and conversion to agricultural land. Hunting at unprecedented scales, both subsistence and commercial, is decimating primate populations most particularly in the Congo, and the forests of West Africa and the South- east Asia. Concern over the possibility of losing species before they are even described has resulted in renewed efforts to properly document primate diversity. Through careful taxonomic and systematic revisions and field expeditions, the number of primate species and subspecies has increased considerably over recent years. Thirty-eight new primates were described from 1990 to 2002. Today recurrent evaluations are indicating at least 346 species and 623 species and subspecies: 168 in Africa, 68 in Madagascar, 181 in Asia, and 206 in South and Central America. Many more have yet to be described, and some revisions underway of more complex taxa such as the tarsiers, galagos and lorises will also increase the number. According to the 2000 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species of the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC), 50 primates are now "Critically Endangered", 116 "Endangered" and a further 95 "Vulnerable". Twenty-seven percent (166) of all primates are now "Critically Endangered" and "Endangered", and overall 42% (261 species and subspecies) are threatened. Almost 20% of primate species are down to a few hundred or a few thousand individuals. A very large number are restricted to the hotspots (highly threatened areas rich in endemic species) identified by Conservation International: Madagascar, the Atlantic forest region of Brazil, northern Colombia, West Africa, China, and parts of South-east Asia With so many primate species already critically endangered, the next decade is clearly a crucial bottleneck, which will demand major conservation efforts if we are to avoid the extinction of numerous species and subspecies. 0004 Sexual Selection and the Evolution of Reproductive Anatomy, Physiology, and Behavior Alan Dixson Conservation and Science, Zoological Society of San Diego, USA, E-mail:adixson@sandiegozoo.org During the last 30 years, research on the evolution of reproduction has been revitalized by Parker's theory of sperm competition and by Eberhard's contributions to understanding genitalic evolution. The classical Darwinian view of precopulatory sexual selection has expanded to include the realization that sexual selection also operates during, and after copulation, to influence the evolution of reproductive anatomy, physiology, and patterns of sexual behavior. Much of this newer research has involved insects and other invertebrates. However, these advances have had wide-ranging implications for understanding the evolution of reproduction in the vertebrates, including the primates. The purpose of this lecture is to review advances in sexual selection theory as they apply specifically to our understanding of sperm competition, genitalic evolution, and copulatory behavior in monkeys, apes, and human beings. Sperm competition has selected for larger relative testes sizes in primate species where females mate with multiple partners during the peri-ovulatory period. However, there is now evidence that sexual selection has also favored the evolution of a larger midpiece in primate sperm, under conditions where sperm competition is most pronounced. This may relate to increased mitochondrial loading and improved sperm motility. Sexual selection has also influenced the evolution of the accessory sexual organs in male primates, seminal coagulation and copulatory plug formation, as well as phallic morphology and patterns of copulatory behavior. Finally, there is the question of whether multiple partner matings and the increased risk of sexually transmitted disease transmission might have affected the evolution of the immune system in primates. Evidence concerning this hypothesis will be reviewed; including some new studies carried out at the Zoological Society of San Diego by Dr. Matt Anderson and myself. 0005 Genetics in Primatology: Elucidating Evolution and Behaviour Jan R. de Ruiter Department of Anthropology, University of Durham, 43 Old Elvet, Durham DH1 2NE; e-mail: Jan.deRuiter@durham.ac.uk Key Words: evolution, phylogenies, population genetics, paternity, microsatellites, mtDNA, dispersal Molecular genetic techniques and the applications of these techniques to primate studies have taken developed rapidly in recent years. Whereas during the 1970's and 1980's paternity studies applying: genetic markers were typically carried out in captive colonies of macaques, such investigations are no~ standard procedures in wild primate populations even of threatened species. Population genetic investigations were being carried out on a few wild populations where animals could be trapped and blood samples could be taken. With the advent of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) it has become much easier to take samples for DNA analysis because only minute amounts are required, and such amounts can be obtained from hair samples or faecel droppings. Moreover, very specific segments of the nuclear and/or mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) can be investigated, and these various loci give different and specific kinds of information. In particular sequence information of the mitochondrial genome has produced a powerful tool to both investigate relationships between taxa as well as population differentiation at a geographical level. Phylogenies improved by DNA information are, for instance, the basis for ] range of subsequent studies addressing questions concerning the evolution of particular traits and evolutionary migration or hybridisation events. Because this mtDNA is maternally inherited such data have also proved informative to identity relatedness in populations through the maternal line, and, together with Y chromosome analysis, it has provided insight into the sex dependent dispersal patterns. Paternity and relatedness studies in social groups based on microsatellites are being carried out on an ever- increasing number of wild primate populations. This information is vital to analyse the evolutionary consequences of primate social strategies and aspects of mate choice and sexual selection. Recently, DNA polymorphisms reflecting functional genetic variation have also been investigated in primate populations. One example is the study of variation at the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) genes and this variation has been related to mate choice. Another example is variation at a gene for colour vision. This genetic var.iation can be related to the evolutionary consequences of this variation. 0006 The What, Why and How of Primate Taxonomy Colin Groves School of Archaeology & Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia, e-mail: colin.groves@anu.edu.au Taxonomy (systematics) has always been a vital baseline for other fields of biology (ecology, behaviour, physiology, anatomy, evolution, biogeography, genetics), but recently the conservation crisis has focused new attention onto the field. It must be understood at the outset that there is no "official" taxonomy. A taxonomic arrangement is a working hypothesis, and like any other scientific hypothesis it should be testable and open to modification when new information becomes available. The problem is that, until rather recently, many taxonomic statements have been inherently untestable because no truly objective, universally applicable criteria have existed. The Biological Species Concept is useful to determine whether two forms are distinct species only when they are sympatric, and so leaves the vast majority of populations unclassifiable because they are allopatric. The Recognition Species Concept has led to major advances in our understanding, but is incomplete, and it too identifies species not by the pattern that we can observe but by the process whereby that pattern is presumed to have been generated. Increasingly, biological taxonomists recommend the Phylogenetic Species Concept, because it relies solely on the evidence that is available, and so is testable, and identifies the units of evolution, of biogeography, of research, and of conservation. The "higher categories" depend on monophyly, but if they are to be defined solely as lineages then how are we to decide which are genera, which families, and so on? There have been proposals, going back to Hennig's work, to link rank to time depth: a genus is a lineage that has been separate for so many million years, a family has been separate for some further length of time, and so on. Some criterion like this must be adopted if taxonomy above the species level is to become a truly objective exercise. I would like, at present, to restrict the time/rank association to the Linnaean (obligatory) categories, leaving the sub- and super- levels for fine degrees of splitting, where required; and I see nothing wrong with leaving some divisions unranked. I will give lots and lots of examples and case studies, and will have many learned things to say about cladistics, morphometrics, and molecular phylogenetics, such as will both delight and dismay. 0007 Understanding Tool Use in Capuchin Monkeys Dorothy M. Fragaszy Psychology Department, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602 USA, e-mail: doree@arches.uga.edu For as long as scientists have watched capuchin monkeys (genus Cebus) in captivity, we have known that these monkeys, unlike all other monkeys, routinely discover how to use objects as tools. This remarkable aspect of their behavior generated many questions. What capabilities of action, perception, and memory enable capuchin monkeys to use tools? Can we predict what kinds of problems capuchin monkeys can spontaneously learn to solve by using a tool? Can common principles explain the discovery of how to use objects as tools in capuchins, great apes, and humans? I believe that we can provide partial answers to these questions. After reviewing the general findings from many studies of tool-using behaviors and behavior with objects in other circumstances in capuchins carried out over the last 70 years, I will address the interpretive issues that these findings raise. I will emphasize the origins of tool use in perception-action routines used to explore objects and surfaces and the challenges that capuchins face with the physical aspects of using an object as a tool. For example, coordinating multiple objects and surfaces through action, accommodating action to variable properties of surfaces and objects, controlling the placement of the distal end of objects held in the hand, modulating body movement to achieve the proper force, tempo, direction, etc. - all these aspects challenge an individual that attempts to act on the environment by using an object as a tool. Knowing how capuchins manage the physical and perceptual challenges of manipulating objects and how they produce relations among objects and surfaces through action provide one way of understanding how they use tools. This way of understanding tool use provides a theoretically rich way to compare capuchins' behavior with that of apes, humans, and other animals that use tools. WHERE TO ORDER Mammalogical Society of China Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Science 19 Zhongguancun Rd., Haidian District Beijing 100080, China Telephone: 86-10-62581474 Fax: 86-10-62581474 E-mail: msc@panda.ioz.ac.cn [We are not sure of availability of copies. Please inquire.] Book received: 8-28-02 Posted date: 9-12-02
URL: http://www.primate.wisc.edu/pin/review/abscare4prim.html
Page last modified:
September 12, 2002
Maintained by the WPRC Library
Return to Review Copies Received
Return to PIN Home Page