ABSTRACT. As quantitative studies on primate positional behavior accumulate the lack of a standard positional mode terminology is becoming an increasingly serious deficiency. Inconsistent use of traditional terms and inappropriate conflation of mode categories hamper interspecific and interobserver comparisons. Some workers use common terms without definition, allowing at least the possibility of misunderstanding. Other researchers coin neologisms tailored to their study species and not clearly enough defined to allow application to other species. Such neologisms may overlap, may completely encompass, or may conflate previously defined labels. The result is, at best, the proliferation of synonyms and, at worst, the creation of confusion where clarity had existed. Historical precedents have sometimes resulted in "catch-all" terms that conflate any number of kinematically different behaviors (e.g. "brachiation," "climbing," and "quadrumanous climbing"). We recognize three areas where distinction of positional modes has some current importance: (1) Modes that require humeral abduction should be distinguished from adducted behaviors; (2) locomotor modes that involve ascent or descent should be distinguished from horizontal locomotor modes; and (3) suspensory modes should be distinguished from supported modes. We recommend a nomenclature that is not dedicated to or derived from any one taxonomic subset of the primates. Here we define 32 primate positional modes, divided more finely into 52 postural sub-modes and 74 locomotor sub-modes.

No abstract

We analyzed how the distribution and abundance of a major consumer, the coyote (Canis latrans) is influenced by the input of food from the sea. In the arid deserts of Baja California, coyote abundance along the shore of the Gulf of California is much higher compared to adjacent inland areas. These high densities are achieved because coastal coyotes are subsidized by the flow of abundant and diverse resources that come directly and indirectly from the ocean. Analysis of scats between coastal and inland sites indicates that the diet breadth of coastal coyotes is expanded (i.e., more food types were eaten) and that much more food is consumed by individuals and populations of coyotes in coastal regions. On average, scat mass at coastal sites is more than double that at inland sites. An average of 47.8% of all items found in coastal scats come directly from the sea. Such allochthonous input facilitates a numerical response: each of our four measures of coyote abundance shows that coyotes are significantly more dense along the coast than inland. Coyote populations on the coast are 2.4-13.7 times more dense than in adjacent inland areas that do not receive marine input. We present data from the literature to suggest that the use of marine resources by carnivorous mammals is widespread worldwide.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract