Monkeying around Anthropocene: Patterns of human-nonhuman primates’ interactions in Brazil
Keywords:Ethnoprimatology, human-nonhuman, conservation
In Anthropocene, approximately 70% of all terrestrial ecosystems are highly modified by human activities and more than a half of all primate’s species in the world are endangered. Here we present results of a systematic review on published articles with an Ethnoprimatology approach, aiming to assess the nationwide pattern and quality of proximity/interaction between human-nonhuman primates in Brazil, a country vulnerable to high deforestation rates while having the highest primate biodiversity in the world. The first article was published 29 years ago and add up to only 36 published articles until present time. Most studies were conducted in Atlantic forest, but higher number and diversity of interactions was described for Amazon. Sapajus, being a generalist and semi-terrestrial primate, was the most cited genus and had the greatest diversity of interactions, including garbage foraging and crop-raiding. Alouatta, the second most cite one, had more symbolic/mystic relationships. Some specialized or forest-specific primates are scarcely mentioned. Studies carried out in both rural and urban environment are almost equal in number but showed differences in types of interactions they describe: garbage foraging, crop-raiding by primates and food offering by humans happening in more urbanized areas and symbolic/mystic relationships and beliefs around nonhuman primates described in rural/indigenous settlements. We urge future studies to describe interactions and proximity carefully specifying the context where they occur. It is relevant to maintain the growing curve of Ethnoprimatological studies in Brazil as a way to aggregate information about different populations of species and help to base conservation strategies of co-existence.
Alves RRN et al (2012). Primates in Traditional Folk Medicine: World Overview. In: Animals in Traditional Folk Medicine. 135-170
Alves RRN, Barboza RRD and Souto WMS (2017). Primates in Traditional Folk Medicine. The International Encyclopedia of Primatology, 1–9. doi:10.1002/9781119179313.wbprim0168
Alves RRN, Souto WMS and Barboza RRD (2016). The Role of Nonhuman Primates in Religious and Folk Medicine Beliefs. In Ethnoprimatology: Primate conservation in the 21st century. 21–45 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-30469-4
Artaxo P (2019) Working together for Amazonia. Science 363:323. https ://doi.org/10.1126/scien ce.aaw69 86
Baker LR et al. (2018). Complexities of local cultural protection in conservation: The case of an Endangered African primate and forest groves protected by social taboos. Oryx 52, 262–270
Barnett AA, Bowler M, Bezerra BM and Defler TR (2013). Ecology and behavior of uacaris (genus Cacajao). Evolutionary Biology Conservation. Titis, Sakis Uacaris doi:10.1017/cbo9781139034210.020
Beel J, and Gipp B (2009). Google Scholar’s Ranking Algorithm: An Introductory Overview. In Birger Larsen and Jacqueline Leta, editors, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI’09), volume 1, pages 230–241, Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), July 2009. International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics. ISSN 2175-1935. Available at www.docear.org
Bezanson M. and Mcnamara A (2019). The what and where of primate field research may be failing primate conservation. Evolutionary Anthropology. 28, 166–178
Bicca-Marques JC and de Freitas, DS (2010). The role of monkeys, mosquitoes, and humans in the occurrence of a yellow fever outbreak in a fragmented landscape in south brazil: Protecting howler monkeys is a matter of public health. Tropical Conservation Science, 3(1), 78–89. doi:10.1177/194008291000300107
Buss G, Romanowski HP and Becker FG (2015). O bugio que habita a mata e a mente dos moradores de Itapuã - Uma análise de percepção ambiental no entorno do Parque Estadual de Itapuã, Viamão, RS. Revista Biociências, Taubaté, v. 21, p. 14-28, 2015 (ISSN 1415-7411)
Ceballos G et al. (2015). Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. Sci. Adv. 1, 9–13
Cormier L and Cormier L (2006). A Preliminary Review of Neotropical Primates in the Subsistence and Symbolism of Indigenous Lowland South American Peoples. Ecol. Environ. Anthropol. 2, 14–32
Cormier LA (2003). Chapter 4: Monkey as food, monkey as child: Guajá symbolic cannibalism. In Kinship with Monkeys: The Guaja Foragers of Eastern Amazonia. Columbia University Press.
Corrêa FM et al (2018). Surviving in the urban–rural interface: Feeding and ranging behavior of brown howlers (Alouatta guariba clamitans) in an urban fragment in southern Brazil. American Journal of Primatology, 80(6), 1–12. doi:10.1002/ajp.22865
da Cruz, DC et al. (2020) An overview of forest loss and restoration in the Brazilian Amazon. New Forests. doi:10.1007/s11056-020-09777-3
Driscoll DA et al. (2018). A biodiversity-crisis hierarchy to evaluate and refine conservation indicators. Natural Ecology and Evolution 2, 775–781
Estrada A et al. (2017). Impending extinction crisis of the world’s primates: Why primates matter. Sci. Adv. 3
Estrada A et al. (2018). Primates in peril: The significance of Brazil, Madagascar, Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo for global primate conservation. PeerJ Life and Environment 2018, 1–57
Fragaszy DM, Visalbergui E, Fedigan LM (2004). The complete capuchin: the biology of the genus Cebus. Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2004
Fuentes A. (2006). Human-Nonhuman Primate Interconnections and Their Relevance Human-Nonhuman Primate Interconnections and Their Relevance to Anthropology to Anthropology. Ecological and Environmental Anthropology, Vol 2, No 2.
Galán-Acedo C et al (2019). The conservation value of human-modified landscapes for the world’s primates. Nature Communications. 10, 1–8
Garcia U (2018). Macacos também choram, ou esboço para um conceito ameríndio de espécie. Revista do Instituto de Estudos Brasileiros [online]. n.69, pp.179-204. ISSN 2316-901X. doi: 10.11606/issn.2316-901x.v0i69p179-204.
Hockings KJ and Mclenna MR. (2016). Problematic Primate Behaviour in Agricultural Landscapes: Chimpanzees as ‘Pests’ and ‘Predators’ In. Managing human-orangutan relationships in rehabilitation (pp.137-156) doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-30469-4_8
Humle T and Hill C (2016). People–primate interactions: implications for primate conservation. In: Wich, Serge A. and Marshall, Andrew J., eds. Introduction to Primate Conservation. 2016 Oxford University Press, pp. 219-240
Jones JPG, Andriamarovololona MM and Hockley N (2008). The importance of taboos and social norms to conservation in Madagascar. Conservation Biology, 22(4), 976–986. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00970.x
Lee P and Priston N (2005). Human attitudes to primates: Perceptions of pests, conflict and consequences for primate conservation. Commensalism and Conflict: The Human-Primate Interface. doi: 10.1002/047001539X.ch1
Leite GC et al (2011) Human-marmoset interactions in a city park. Applied Animal Behavior. Sci. 132, 187–192
Levacov D et al. (2007). Tráfico nacional de primatas: Táxons, origens, destinos. In: Brazilian Primatological Congress, VII, 2007. Anais Belo Horizonte, p. 87.
Lewis SL and Maslin MA (1964). Defining the Anthropocene. Nature doi:10.1038/nature14258
Malone N et al (2014) Ethnoprimatology: Critical interdisciplinarity and multispecies approaches in anthropology. Crit. Anthropol. 34, 8–29
Mcdonald RI et al. (2020). Research gaps in knowledge of the impact of urban growth on biodiversity. Nature Sustainability. 16–24
McKinney T (2014). Species-Specific Responses to Tourist Interactions by White-Faced Capuchins (Cebus imitator) and Mantled Howlers (Alouatta palliata) in a Costa Rican Wildlife Refuge. International Journal of Primatology, 35(2), 573–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-014-9769-1
Moher D et al. (2009). The PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Available in: www.prisma-statement.org.
Naughton-Treves L et al (1998). Temporal patterns of crop raiding by primates: linking food availability in croplands and adjacent forest. J. Appl. Ecol. 35, 596–606
Newbold T et al (2015). Global effects of land use on local terrestrial biodiversity. Nature 520, 45–50
Nunes AV et al. (2017) Conhecimento e uso de primatas por uma população extrativista no Vale do Juruá, Amazônia. Biodiversidade Brasileira. 7, 123–132
Paim FP et al. (2012) Does Ecotourism Activity Affect Primates In Mamirauá Reserve? A Atividade De Ecoturismo Na Reserva Mamirauá Afeta Os Primatas? Uakari, v. 8, n. 2, p. 43 - 50, 2012 . Special Issue: Sustainable Tourism
Palmer A and Malone N (2018) Extending Ethnoprimatology: Human–Alloprimate Relationships in Managed Settings. International Journal of Primatology 39, 831–851
Peres C (1991). Humboldt’s woolly monkeys decimated by hunting in Amazonia. Oryx 25, 89–95
Prado HM, Forline LC and Kipnis R (2012). Analysis of sustainability in an Amazonian indigenous community As práticas de caça entre os Awá-Guajá: contribuições para uma análise de sustentabilidade. Boletim do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi Ciências Humanas 7, 479–491 .
Rajão R et al. (2020). The rotten apples of Brazil’s agribusiness. Science 369, 246–248
RedFord K. (1992). The empty forest. Bioscience, v. 42, n. 6, p. 412- 422.
RENCTAS (Rede Nacional Contra O Tráfico De Animais Silvestres (2001) 1º Relatório Nacional sobre o tráfico de fauna silvestre, 2001. 107p. Available in: . Accessed on: 10 jun. 2019.
Riley EP (2013). Contemporary Primatology in Anthropology: Beyond the Epistemological Abyss. American Anthropologist. 115, 411–422
Rocha LC and Fortes VB (2015). Perceptions and attitudes of rural residents towards capuchin monkeys, in the area of influence of the Dona Francisca Hydroelectric power plant, South Brazil. Ambiente e Sociedade 18.
Rodrigues NN and Martinez RA (2014). Wildlife in our backyard: interactions between Wied’s marmoset Callithrix kuhlii (Primates: Callithrichidae) and residents of Ilhéus, Bahia, Brazil. Wildlife Biology. 20, 91–96
Roe D et al. (2020). Beyond banning wildlife trade: COVID-19, conservation and development. World Development Vol 136 DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105121
Rossi L et al. (2018). The role of indirect evidence and traditional ecological knowledge in the discovery and description of new ape and monkey species since 1980. Primates volume 59, pages 327–337
Sabbatini G et al. (2006) Interactions between humans and capuchin monkeys (Cebus libidinosus) in the Parque Nacional de Brasília, Brazil. Applied Animal Behavior. Sci. 97, 272–283
Sasaki K, Sasaki Y and Fox SF (2010). Endangered traditional beliefs in Japan: Influences on snake conservation. Herpetological Conservation and Biology, 5(3), 474–485.
Schneider H. (2018). What role for culture in conservation? Oryx, 52(2), 199–200. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605318000248
Shepard GHJr (2002) Primates in Matsigenka Subsistence and World View. IN Primates Face to Face: The Conservation Implications of Human-nonhuman Primate Interconnections. A. Fuentes and L. D. Wolfe, eds. Pp 101 - 136 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Sillero-Zubiri C and Switzer D (2001). Crop raiding primates: Searching for alternative, humane ways to resolve conflict with farmers in Africa. People and Wildlife Initiative. Conservation Research Unit, Oxford University.
Spagnoletti N et al (2017). Coexistence Between Humans and Capuchins (Sapajus libidinosus): Comparing Observational Data with Farmers’ Perceptions of Crop Losses. International Journal of Primatology. v 38, pages 243–262(2017) doi: 10.1007/s10764-016-9926-9
Torres EUJ et al. (2016) Local Ecological Knowledge about Endangered Primates in a Rural Community in Paraíba, Brazil. Folia Primatologica. 87, 262–277
Urbani B and Cormier LA (2014). The Ethnoprimatology of the Howler Monkeys (Alouatta spp.): From Past to Present. Howler Monkeys. pp 259-280
Voltolini JC, Paulista EU and Claro R (2018). Percepção ambiental dos moradores do entorno da Mata do Bugio sobre bugios-ruivos Alouatta guariba clamitans Cabrera 1940, em Taubaté, SP. Revista Biociências, 23(2), 54–64.
Young HS et al. 2016. Patterns, Causes, and Consequences of Anthropocene Defaunation. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 333–358. doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-112414-054142