Primatology.net

As described in a recently published paper in Biology Letters, the Philippine Tarsier (Tarsius syrichta) has been found to communicate through extremely high pitched vocalisations in the ultrasound domain, undetectable by human ear. These presumed mute primates baffled primatologists… How can such lack of calls be observed when closely related species are clearly dependent on frequent vocal signals within the group? However the mystery was solved when upon further inspection, these little guys could be heard communicating among the highest frequency levels detected from any terrestrial mammals. It is now thought the extremes of these calls could allow conspecifics to communicate whilst remaining undetected by predators or prey and/or allow individuals to be more easily heard through background noise.

(Ramsier et al. 2012) Primate communication in the pure ultrasound.
DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2011.1149

A paper released this earlier this week has been first to document spontaneous prosocial behaviour in chimpanzees, finally drawing a line under the question as to whether the welfare of others is considered during choice making in this species; a controversial topic, where such behaviours have been often concluded to be absent in any primate apart from humans (generally from research within the social sciences). This research was carried out at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center by Victoria Horner, and Frans de Waal.

Pairs of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) where placed into testing rooms, separated by a mesh barrier. One individual had access to 30 tokens, divided into two separate colours – all of which could be given to the experimenter in exchange for food. Half of these when exchanged resulted in a selfish outcome in which only the individual handing the token received a reward, whereas the other half resulted in an altruistic outcome where both individuals received an equal reward. The individual handing the tokens to the experimenter was rewarded regardless.

If chimpanzees where choosing under a system driven by selfish interests, there should be a preference towards the choice where only the individual in control of the tokens receives a reward, and if the choice was purely random, each token would be expected to be seen 50% of the time. However, it was found that pairs where significantly more likely to share a reward (displaying prosocial behaviour), than choose the selfish option.

Victoria Hornera, J. Devyn Cartera, Malini Suchaka, and Frans B. M. de Waal (2011). Spontaneous prosocial choice by chimpanzees Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences : 10.1073/pnas.1111088108

When trained Macaques were given a choice of three answers in a computer game; one of which was correct, one incorrect, and an additional option to pass – macaques where shown to choose the latter option to pass rather than risk being incorrect. The macaques were rewarded for a correct answer, but an incorrect answer initiated a pause in the game until the next question.

The “pass“ option was used in an identical fashion to that of human participants, and the macaques were observed to show self-doubting behaviour – a trait which was previously thought to be unique to us. When capuchins were faced with an identical challenge, they failed to take this third option, and seemed unaware when they are likely to make an error.

More information and Video at; BBC – Earth News

San Diego Zoo welcomed the birth of a new baby gorilla last month. I just found the photos on ZooBorn, a blog that you maybe interested in if you’re into newborn animals. The details of the birth are documented on the ZooBorn post, so jump on over there to read up. Otherwise, enjoy these photos and have a good weekend!

I’m scouring the American Journal of Primatology for a paper on gorillas using tools as weapons in the wild. National Geographic News says the paper is out, but I can’t find it anywhere in the early edition nor in the current issues. I’ll continue looking, but in the mean time here’s what we got to run on (and it ain’t much)

“Researchers [doing a three year study of Cross River gorillas (Gorilla gorilla diehli)] in Cameroon have documented three cases in which the [gorillas] threw clumps of grass or tree branches at humans.”

The people who documented the behavior suggest that the gorillas possibly learned their unusual behavior from interactions with humans. Captive gorillas have been documented picking up stone throwing from their chimpanzee neighbors, so it’s not too improbably that wild gorillas could pick up grass and branch hurling from human neighbors. How did these gorillas learn the behavior? Could it be possibly due to mirror neurons? Conveniently this is a perfect transition into an upcoming PNAS paper on tool use and mirror neurons in macaques, that was announced in this ScienceNOW news article,

“To investigate how the brain performs this sleight of hand, [the team] recorded brain activity in two macaque monkeys. Each was trained for 6 to 8 months to grasp items of food with pliers. The team documented the activity of 113 neurons in F5 and in a brain area called F1, which has also been implicated in the manipulation of objects. The researchers first established the brain’s firing sequence when the monkeys grasped only with their hands. The experiment was then repeated while the monkeys used normal pliers that required first opening the hand and then closing it to grasp the food. The same neurons fired in the same order. Remarkably, the same neurons also fired, in the same order, when the monkeys used “reverse pliers” that required them to close their fingers first and then open them to take the food.”

The research is coming from the University of Parma which seems to be specializing in this sorta research because about a year and half ago they documented mirror neurons role in mimicry. In the new paper, the researchers,

“conclude that when learning to use a tool, the pattern of neuronal activity is somehow transferred from the hand to the tool, “as if the tool were the hand of the monkey and its tips were the monkey’s fingers.” As for how the same neurons could affect both the opening and the closing of the hand, the team speculates that they may be connected with other sets of neurons that more directly control these movements. The authors also point out that area F5 is rich in so-called mirror neurons, a type of nerve cell discovered earlier… that fires both when a primate performs an action and when it observes another individual doing the same thing. Mirror neurons in F5, the authors suggest, may be involved in this transfer process as a monkey learns how to use a tool by watching others.”

The first observations of gorillas using tools in the wild was made a couple years ago, and last year we saw (albeit not too convincingly) a chimp fashioning a spear to hunt, so I’m not too surprised about this news… I just wanna see it!

One of Time Magazine‘s “Hero’s for the Planet 2000“, known for discovering new species (Callicebus bernhardi, Callicebus stephennashi, etc.) and focusing his attentions on protecting the rainforest has been convicted of failing to apply for a permit on behalf of the monkey refuge in his Brazilian home. It seems that without the permit (or license) Brazil sees the orphaned monkeys as stolen.

Dutch Biologist Marc van Roosmalen reported that he had previously filed for permits (1996, 1998, 2000) but received no reply from Ibama (the environmental protection agency). Apparently it is generally accepted that if you don’t receive word after 45 days, the application has been accepted. While officials have acknowledged that van Roosmalen did apply, they deny that the 45-day rule is “not explicit in the legislation.”

I first learned of this from Primate-Science listserv yesterday where the post began with a statement of shock before requesting suggestions on how everyone could help… feel free to post your own thoughts which I will gladly pass along.

(photo courtesy of the Apenheul Foundation via Radio Netherlands Worldwide)

Yesterday I shared with you news about the recently orphaned baby gorilla, Ndakasi. In today’s post I will show you a graphic photo of his dead mother. Her name is Rubiga, and she was shot in the back of the head. A autopsy confirmed this, removing two bullets from the back of her head.

I share Paulin’s sentiments. These photos are horrible.

“But it is the reality of what the Gorillas and the Rangers have been through since Friday. It is important that the world sees. I do not want to offend or upset, but it is what is happening.”

So I’ll be straight up honest with you here, I’m still a bit shell shocked with this comment left this evening that basically defending the bushmeat industry.

I know there are always whack jobs out there, but this person really took the cake; his or her arguments for bushmeat, or ‘survival foods’ as they term it, seemed to mimmick a holocaust denier’s rhetoric. I guess I am ignorant and have been naive to assume that people are in favor of protecting endangered species, especially great apes and other primates, from being consumed by humans.

Bushmeat and poaching is a very real problem that faces those of us interested in the conservation of primates. An example that comes to my mind happened earlier this year, when a silverback male gorilla was shot and killed by rebels mainly for sport. And just yesterday came news of another example, which is just as depressing. It has just been reported in National Geographic’s Photos in the News but original came by way of Paulin and his blog, Gorilla Protection,

“June 11, 2007—A baby mountain gorilla has been left orphaned and fighting for its life after its mother was shot and killed in eastern Congo, African wildlife workers report.

Rangers discovered the two-month-old gorilla clinging to the breast of its slain mother last Friday in Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Rebel militias in the area have been accused of slaughtering and eating the critically endangered apes.

The baby, named Ndakasi, is in critical condition, having spent some 18 hours alone after its mother was shot in the arm and then “execution style” in the back of the head, said WildlifeDirect, the African conservation nonprofit. The find comes as a grim counterpoint to the recent rare birth of a mountain gorilla in the park.

The orphaned newborn is now receiving emergency treatment from the Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project.

Known as Rubiga, the dead female belonged to one of the largest remaining mountain gorilla groups, which has 34 members, WildlifeDirect said. “

Defenders may say these acts of killings are necessary to sustain nutrition and food to people without resources to buy meat. But this is not sustainable hunting and should not be advocated whatsoever. Species like gorillas are severely endangered and hunting them to extinction will not provide stable nutritional income for people. I can’t believe I have to explain that, but it seems like some don’t get it. Furthermore. hunting them displaces and disbands gorilla families causing a ripple effect. Gorillas need not be hunted, that’s the bottom line.

Being ‘green’ or ecologically conscious is making big waves in current popular culture, especially in the United States. Many initiatives, such as clean fuels and renewable energy, seem like excellent alternatives to our energy sources we predominantly use right now. This is generally a good thing.

But not all of these initiatives are ecological so great when implemented.

Just last week, I toldya how the palm oil industry is displacing and effectively killing orangutans to the brink of extinction.

Well, it seems like Green Peace, a ecological activist movement, has also gotten word on this issue and is mobilizing a strong and effective campaign to raise awareness and hopefully prevent further deforestation and deaths. I was contacted by Andrew, on behalf of Green Peace to help spread the word.

The following video is something you need to watch and you should blog about, digg, email, etc.:

In his email to me, Andrew wrote:

“I am one of many people trying to get some exposure for this campaign and spread the word about the issues surrounding bio-fuels that people, even your perhaps more informed site visitors, might not know. This is a video I think they and everyone else should at east watch and be aware of the message it contains. Green economics, politics and practices are becoming increasingly complex and tied into business. What people are doing that they think IS green and helping animals might really be making things much worse. Its important for people to know they don’t have to preach, take sides or chain themselves to the nearest shrub! Just be informed and help make others.”

I couldn’t say it any better, Andrew. Biofuels may help the battle against climate change, but they are currently doing more harm than good. If rain forests are cut down to make way to grow ‘green fuels’, it will not only destroy homes for animals like the Orang-utans, this will also be catastrophic for the climate releasing more greenhouse gases from destroying forests than will be saved by using biofuels. (more)

For visitors of this site that are from the UK, you can help the effort by sending a email to your transport minister, Stephen Ladyman, telling him that we need for rigorous controls on biofuels. Otherwise the green dream really will become a nightmare.

So please spread the word, at least by digging or stumbling the video!

The following post is a departure from my usual reporting on an interesting primate related tidbit of research. I’ll be posting about how I have thought about how to study primate brain evolution research. These are just ideas I have brainstormed. It is very probable that people are doing this out in their respective labs but I’m not in the know of what’s totally current. I hope you are interested in what scope of primate brain evolution research I will be discussion… I’ll be mostly taking in a functional genomic and computational biology approach, but that’s not to say more objective sciences such as psychology can’t fit into this game plan.

To start off, understanding primate brain evolution, specifically the biological mechanisms by how the primate brains have been positively selected for by size involves two complementary aspects of research. One of it is to identify the genes involved in brain growth and development, as well as their expression patterns. This is wet lab work, a whole lot of tissue sampling, mRNA isolation, cDNA synthesis and RT-PCR amplification, gene quantification and qualification and ultimately sequencing. At this level, one would need to sample multiple samples of representative primates (that have their genomes sequenced) and different developmental stages and populations.

Once these key players can be identified, the functions of these genes need to be well understood. Of course making knockout monkeys will be a costly and time consuming endeavor full of ethical issues, so I imagine having knockout neuron cultures can help understand the function of these genes better when they aren’t expressed. That’s a bit hard, neurons are awfully fickle to grown in culture. Maybe reporter constructs? Also, other non-traditional research such as sequence homology to other known proteins can help isolate potential functions based on structure.

Now once these key developmental genes have been classified, their relative importance should be noted… or in other words, one needs to organize which genes are specific to all primates and which are specific to fewer primates. Do these genes correlate with the known lineage of primates? If a unique pattern can be extracted, this will make the second aspect of research much easier and conclusive. This is the computational biology approach, using computers, statistics, and other mathematical models to identify what genes were mutated the most to yield the most growth. What genes remained fairly consistent? Can we estimate ages of coalescence or divergence, are there unique mutations to populations or species of primates… ultimately can we begin to make a phylogenetic tree of these genes and their changes throughout evolutionary time?

As I currently laid it out, these two field complement each other and if anything one is dependent on the other. Currently, I know of computational studies that seem to search high and low to find genes that have been positively selected for in primates by scanning and comparing entire genomes. If a hit is found, the research then shifts backwards to estimate functions based on the sequence homology to other known genes and their functions. While that maybe a useful, quick and easy approach, it’s all sorts of wrong. It is wrong because it is the needle in the haystack method. I advise one first narrow down the list, by doing the functional genomic screens, which is arduous and tedious, but much more quantitative and thorough. That way, one can limit things down to candidate genes specific to a species, developmental stage, etc. The playing field will be much more narrow and the computations will be much more conclusive.

What do you think? Do I have it right, do I have it wrong? Not to be rubbing my ego, but I think I have a thorough plan here — one that would make the most killer dissertation ever. Do you know of any researchers doing it this way? If any one out there, who reads this blog, carries out primate brain evolution research please feel free to comment and discuss. I’m really curious to know if what I have been thinking is even right.