Primatology.net

In an announcement today at the annual meeting of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists in Philadelphia, Jim Westgate (Lamar University and University of Texas-Austin), Dana Cope (College of Charleston), and Chris Beard (Carnegie Museum of Natural History) shared their discovery of a new primate genus and three new primate species found in the Lake Casa Blanca International State Park in Laredo. The teeth used to identify the new species and genus (molar, pre-molar, and incisor) were found in 42 million-year-old swamp deposits of the Eocene age Laredo Formation. More information, including formal names, will be released in a future publication.

Coming from a graduate program where I had the opportunity to study humans as well as non-human animals, I sometimes became frustrated with the liberties that were (seemingly) allowed in research with humans, but not non-human animals. Namely the use of physiological markers (facial expressions in infants and young children) in identifying emotions. Emotion regulation studies have their fair share of critics just as behavioral research does, but as I sat through presentations with facial expressions being labeled as/associated with certain emotions, I couldn’t help but think about how unacceptable this would be if the subjects were non-human primates (that would have difficulty verbally expressing their feelings… just like infants and young tots).

As someone who believes facial expressions reveal important information (whether you’re human or not), you can imagine my excitement to see research involving a connection of facial expressions in human and non-human primates. An article from Yerkes National Primate Research Center newsroom, “Chimpanzee Facial Expressions Are Helping Researchers Understand Human Communication,” describes non-human primate facial expressions as complex and potentially helpful in understanding the evolution of human emotional communication.

Dr. Lisa Parr, Director of Yerkes National Primate Research Center Cognitive Testing Facility and Chimpanzee Core:

“This discovery is an important step to help researchers recognize facial movements and understand why they are important. While some expressions, such as a playful look, can be identified using a single feature, other expressions, such as when a chimp bares his teeth, require looking at numerous characteristics within the face, including the eyes and lips.”

“Sometimes it’s easy to read what people are feeling, but at other times, we have to look at multiple places on their faces. Ultimately, we want to better understand what people are feeling and expressing emotionally because it helps us empathize with one another.”

Parr created the Chimpanzee Facial Action Coding System in order to better examine the complex nature of facial expressions. Chimps were asked to examine and match 3D pictures of facial expressions. Sheila Sterk, Senior Animal Behavior Management Specialist elaborated on the process:

“After the chimpanzees matched similar images, we separated individual features of the original animated expression, such as a raised brow, by frame and pieced the frames back together to create a variation of the original expression. The chimpanzees then were asked to match the new expression to the original one. This is how we determined when the chimpanzees were using a single feature or if they needed more than one feature to match the similar expressions.”

(courtesy of Science Direct; photo credit to Yerkes National Primate Research Center)

Parr was scheduled to present the data of her research last weekend at the Mind of the Chimpanzee conference. I’m excited to read more about this research. If anyone sees any articles pop up, please spread the word.

On Friday, March 30th, the London Zoo will present a new enclosure to the public, Gorilla Kingdom (check out the website – there’s a fun little gorilla video clip in the header).

Effie, from Leipzig Zoo, joins Bobby and Zaire in an effort to recreate a natural gorilla harem.

The £5.3m project includes indoor and outdoor play areas where the gorillas will live with colubus monkeys.

(photo courtesy of BBC News)

(photo courtesy of BBC News)

Most people possessing any familiarity with our closest relatives know that there are two species of chimpanzees: Bonobos (Pan paniscus) and the common Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Some researchers believe that bonobos and common chimps diverged around 0.9 million years ago (Won and Hey, 2002).

Many may not know that taxonomies further divide common chimps into three subspecies, represented by three distinct populations separated by geographic divisions (e.g. distance, rivers). They are the Western, Central, and Eastern, known as Pan troglodytes versus, Pan troglodytes troglodytes, and Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii, respectively (Groves, 2001).

Previous genetic studies, combined with the nearly complete absence of behavioral or morphological differences, have led some to conclude that the populations are not distinct subspecies (Fischer et al., 2004). In contrast, a new study by researchers from four different institutions seems to show that the three common chimpanzee populations are indeed genetically distinct, and that little or no gene flow occurs between the groups (Becquet et al., 2007).

Recently published in PLoS Genetics, Genetic structure of chimpanzee populations reports on the largest genetic study of chimps to date. They analyzed the genetic material from 84 individuals: 6 bonobos and 78 common chimpanzees.

Their conclusions:

• The western, central, and eastern subspecies designations correspond to clusters of individuals with similar allele frequencies;
• There is little evidence for admixture between groups in the wild; and
• Central and eastern chimpanzees are most closely related in time to each other than either of them are to western chimps.

They failed to find any support for a fourth subspecies (Pan troglodytes vellorosus), originally proposed following mtDNA studies of chimpanzees living near the Sanaga river in Cameroon (Gonder et al., 2006).

References:

• Becquet C, Patterson N, Stone A, Przeworski M, Reich D (2007) Genetic structure of chimpanzee populations. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.0030066.eor
• Fischer A, Wiebe V, Paabo S, Przeworski M (2004) Evidence for a complex demographic history of chimpanzees. Mol Biol Evol. 21:799-808.
• Gonder MK, Disotell TR, Oates JF (2006) New genetic evidence on the evolution of chimpanzee populations and implications for taxonomy. International Journal of Primatology 27:1103-1127.
• Won YJ, Hey J (2002) Divergence population genetics of chimpanzees. Mol Biol Evol. 22, 297-307.

[Map from Wikipedia]

Personally, I have my own beef with sociobiology a.k.a. evolutionary psychology. I have yet to see it venture from a story telling, subjective science. But my issues don’t prevent me from acknowledging and respecting progressive work done in this subfield of behavioral studies and primatology.

I don’t know where Nick Wade truly stands about sociobiology, but I can tell he generally shares my sentiments on appreciating this issue, because he has eloquently summarized the work of Frans de Waal in his new article in the New York Times. I trust that you can tell what the topic and the scope of article is by reading the title, “Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate Behavior.”

At its core, this article is useful because it outlines the four basic behaviors for sociality, empathy, the ability to learn and follow social rules, reciprocity and peacemaking. If you think about it, our social structure is founded on it, and based off of years of Frans’ observations of chimps, macaques, and rhesus monkeys these traits exist to some degree in non-human primates.

Dr. de Waal makes the tangent that human morality has spawned off of primate sociality,

“but with two extra levels of sophistication. People enforce their society’s moral codes much more rigorously with rewards, punishments and reputation building. They also apply a degree of judgment and reason, for which there are no parallels in animals. “

The article goes on with a discussion on how Frans has stood up to criticism, competing and contrasting theories on the origins of human morality. I also noticed Nick opens talk about the origins and concept of religion, something I talked about here. But aside from the intricate subtopics, at the very minimum this article also provides us with some insight on why some of us study primate behavior…. even if it is story telling.

I’m curious to open this thread up to a discussion of how and where we think we developed our sense of morality? Is morality a behavioral trait inherited from our evolutionary relatives? Or is our morality a bi-product of our human only cultures? What do you think? Is there a grey area between these two? Can we ever truly find out where morality originated?

Towards the end of last year we posted on the anticipated release of 200 orangutans from the Nyaru Menteng Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Center in Central Kalimantan to the protected Baktikop forest. Their departure provided more room for 48 new residents from Thailand (which recently became 50 new residents).

Willie Smits (Nyaru Menteng Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Center) reports:

“Two of the orangutans have given birth, both to male babies”

It has been discovered, since their arrival at the Center, that many are dealing with tuberculosis and hepatitis. Fortunately,

“The mothers and the bab[ies] are healthy.”

Last week, we were sent an email asking for help in locating a chimpanzee refuge near Los Angeles. The email specifically asked,

“Do [we know of] any organizations that have a chimp facility near Los Angeles?”

Betsy, rolled up her sleeves and did some serious Googling and the best found match was, Animal Haven Ranch in Caliente, California, which is about two hours outside of LA.

Unfortunately, neither Betsy, nor I, can find a website for more information on this organization and the only sites that pop up are escape/attack related ones, like this. I wanted to extend out the question to our community, and ask if we are on the right track? If so, does Animal Haven Ranch still operate? Does anyone have contact information for this organization or a website? Any help will be doing both us and the visitor that sent us the initial email a great service in helping locate more information on this chimpanzee facility.

To update Kambiz’s previous mention of Carol Noon’s chimp refuge, nine more chimpanzees arrived at the Save the Chimps 200 acre facility in Florida on Friday bringing the total number of residents to 99.

Dr. Carol Noon, Save the Chimps Director, on their trip from New Mexico:

“When they arrived, I got on the truck and they were all yawning because when they’re on a road trip, they like to stay up late and … look out the window, so when they get here they sleep most of the next day.”

The transfers take quite a bit of time and energy on behalf of the staff as well as the chimps. Social/family groups are formed prior to any moves. Originally estimated to be in 2008, Noon now estimates the completion of the facility to occur mid-2009.

(photo courtesy of Save the Chimps)

The privately funded facility houses 12 separate islands where the chimps have access to indoor and outdoor enclosures. Kudos to Dr. Noon and her staff for creating such a large and amazing facility. I look forward to reading more updates and seeing their Observational Learning Center open up research possibilities and public awareness:

“Our Observational Learning Center will serve to cut through the fog of misunderstanding about this noble, endangered species that is our closest genetic cousin. Participants will gain close insight into the societal structure that chimpanzees create for themselves when allowed to live free of harm’s way. With a television monitor system, people can watch the chimps in their habitat without intruding on their lifestyle.”

Just want to quickly point out some interesting reading that popped up in this month’s issue of Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology (and in a LiveScience post). Estrus cycle asynchrony in wild female chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii. The authors (Matsumoto-Oda, et al.) highlight the prevalence of the synchronized cycle mating strategy (among primates and other animals) before examining their current research statistic: the Estrus Synchrony Index (ESI), which focuses on maximal swelling and periovulatory periods.

ESI = var (Fm/Fc)/[mean(Fm/Fc){1 – mean(Fm/Fc)}]

Fm = the number of females in maximal swelling
Fc = the number of cycling females

In short, the group of chimpanzees studied exhibited asynchronous estrus cycles.

While some animals synchronize reproductive cycles to benefit from typical things like the wet season (abundance of food), safety in numbers, alloparenting, etc., chimps are cycling at different times to potentially benefit from a reduction in female-female mate competition and a reduction in male sexual coercion.

“Synchrony avoidance may therefore represent a tactic that permits a female to exercise limited choice for high-ranking males, rather than mating the first male that encounters and coerces her.”

It’s an interesting and seemingly appropriate find given the social structure of chimpanzee groups. I wonder what else there is to it… is there any rhyme or reason amongst the asynchrony? Are dominant females cycling so that they give birth when environmental conditions are at their best?

Did you know that between October 2005 to September 2006, US airport inspectors “reported 50 incidents of discovered bushmeat, with each shipment averaging about 9 pounds? That works out to about one shipment being caught every week!”

That is what the CDC has reported in an article over at ABC News. The article, “Bushmeat: Curse of the Monkey’s Paw” reminds us that bushmeat trade is still prevalent, and there is an unusually high demand for this meat here in the US, which I outlined last year.

Aside from the ecological and conservation impact the bushmeat trade has made, it is an awfully disease ridden industry… one which potentially started off HIV/AIDS. This quote drives home the problem,

“But the amount of bushmeat discovered and confiscated by federal agents represents just the tip of the iceberg, said Heather Eves, director of the Bushmeat Crisis Task Force.

Based on “limited studies that we are aware of, it seems like [bushmeat sales on the U.S. black market are] on the order of 15,000 pounds a month,” she said.

Anecdotal evidence suggests a variety of ways the meat is smuggled into the country, Eves said.

“Carrying it in duty-free bags through customs, in luggage, shipping it in the mail and carrying it on their bodies. On the commercial level, shipments are often embedded in dried fish,” she said.

From there, it often finds its way into the markets of American cities that have large concentrations of immigrants from Western and Central Africa.

“We don’t have a handle on how much is coming in. The perception is that we’re only catching a fraction of what’s actually entering the country. It is difficult to know where to search. … There aren’t that many direct flights from Africa, but we’re wary of connecting flights,” said the CDC’s McQuiston.

The risk of diseases jumping from animals to humans is very real. In addition to the SARS and bird flu epidemics out of Asia in recent years, “it is generally understood that HIV arose through contact with nonhuman primates,” said Nina Marano, a veterinarian at the CDC.”

The article goes on to talk about Simian Foamy Virus, another topic we touched on too. But I appreciate William Karesh’s, director of the Department of Field Veterinary Programs at the Wildlife Conservation Society quote at the end of the article. He brings in how bushmeat, human population growth, and logging intersect,

“‘A lack of alternatives, a population boom and better access to forests along roads cut by logging companies’ have given people the desire and means to kill a diversity of wild animals…”