The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record.

No abstract

No abstract

Primates occupy a liminal space between humans and animals. On the Caribbean island of St. Kitts, translocated vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus aethiops sabaeus) are respected creatures, yet they cause problems. Vervets regularly consume crops on farms and are considered “pests”; still, Kittitians express empathy and understanding for them based largely on the monkeys' display of human-like behaviours. Using data from interviews with 64 Kittitian farmers, we deconstruct the symbolism of the vervet monkey in St. Kitts and analyse how farmers give the monkeys identities that are meaningful only within human social expectations. Our findings reveal that Kittitian farmers consider monkeys to be clever and emotive, displaying complex intentions such as revenge and remorse. Yet, crop-foraging behaviour is a regular and negative experience for the majority of farmers in this study, and the monkeys' presence itself is a constant reminder of the multitude of challenges farmers face in a newly adopted tourism economy that no longer prioritises agriculture. Our results reveal that while vervet crop consumption is a significant problem in St. Kitts, it is the monkeys' boundary-crossing status that drives the growing mentality that “the monkey problem” is completely out of control.

Free‐ranging vervet monkeys ( Chlorocebus aethiops sabaeus ) currently reside on the Caribbean islands of St Kitts, Nevis, Barbados, St Martin/St Maarten, and Tortola. The St Kitts, Nevis, and Barbados populations exist as a result of humans translocating them from West Africa, and the St Martin/St Maarten and Tortola populations are the result of escaped or released pets brought in from St Kitts and Nevis. Little research has been done on the Nevis, St Martin/St Maarten, and Tortola populations, but the Kittitian and Nevisian populations have been subject to a significant number of biomedical and behavioral studies.

The shared evolutionary histories and anatomical similarities between humans and non-human primates create dynamic interconnections between these alloprimates. In this foreword to Folia Primatologica's special issue on “Ethnographic Approaches in Primatology,” we review the ethnographic method and existing literature at the intersection of primatology and ethnography. We summarize, compare and contrast the 5 contributions to this special issue to highlight why the human-non-human primate interface is a compelling area to investigate via ethnographic approaches and to encourage increased incorporation of ethnography into the discipline of primatology. Ethnography is a valuable and increasingly popular tool with its use no longer limited to anthropological practitioners investigating traditional, non-Western peoples. Scholars from many disciplines now use ethnographic methods to investigate all members of our globalised world, including non-humans. As our closest living relatives, non-human primates (hereafter “primates”) are compelling subjects and thus appear in a range of contexts within ethnographic investigations. The goal of this special issue is to highlight the trajectory of research at the intersection of primatology and ethnography and to illustrate the importance of ethnographic methods for the advancement of primatology as a discipline.

Background Dengue, chikungunya and Zika viruses (DENV, CHIKV and ZIKV) are transmitted in sylvatic transmission cycles between non-human primates and forest (sylvan) mosquitoes in Africa and Asia. It remains unclear if sylvatic cycles exist or could establish themselves elsewhere and contribute to the epidemiology of these diseases. The Caribbean island of St. Kitts has a large African green monkey (AGM) (Chlorocebus aethiops sabaeus) population and is therefore ideally suited to investigate sylvatic cycles. Methods We tested 858 AGM sera by ELISA and PRNT for virus-specific antibodies and collected and identified 9704 potential arbovirus vector mosquitoes. Mosquitoes were homogenized in 513 pools for testing by viral isolation in cell culture and by multiplex RT-qPCR after RNA extraction to detect the presence of DENV, CHIKV and ZIKVs. DNA was extracted from 122 visibly blood-fed individual mosquitoes and a polymorphic region of the hydroxymethylbilane synthase gene (HMBS) was amplified by PCR to determine if mosquitoes had fed on AGMs or humans. Results All of the AGMs were negative for DENV, CHIKV or ZIKV antibodies. However, one AGM did have evidence of an undifferentiated Flavivirus infection. Similarly, DENV, CHIKV and ZIKV were not detected in any of the mosquito pools by PCR or culture. AGMs were not the source of any of the mosquito blood meals. Conclusion Sylvatic cycles involving AGMs and DENV, CHIKV and ZIKV do not currently exist on St. Kitts.

No abstract