2013
DOI: 10.1002/ajpa.22378
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An investigation of ecological correlates with hand and foot morphology in callitrichid primates

Abstract: Studies of primate taxomony and phylogeny often depend on comparisons of limb dimensions, yet there is little information on how morphology correlates and contributes to foraging strategies and ecology. Callitrichid primates are ideal for comparative studies as they exhibit a range of body size, limb proportions and diet. Many callitrichid species exhibit a high degree of exudativory and to efficiently exploit these resources they are assumed to have evolved morphologies that reflect a level of dependence on t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 121 publications
(149 reference statements)
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Marmosets are small-bodied Neotropical monkeys and committed arboreal quadrupeds (Stevenson and Rylands, 1988;Garber, 1992;Rylands and de Faria, 1993;Souto et al, 2007). Through adaptation to facilitate gumnivory on large vertical tree trunks, marmosets have become quite derived relative to other primates (Lacher et al, 1984;Sussman and Kinzey, 1984;Garber, 1992;Hamrick, 1998;Vinyard et al, 2009;Young, 2009;Smith and Smith, 2013). In contrast to most other extant primates, marmosets have claw-like tegulae, rather than flat nails, on all digits except the hallux, and have a relatively short, adducted hallux with diminished intrinsic musculature (Beattie, 1927;Midlo, 1934;Szalay and Dagosto, 1988;Hamrick, 1998).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Marmosets are small-bodied Neotropical monkeys and committed arboreal quadrupeds (Stevenson and Rylands, 1988;Garber, 1992;Rylands and de Faria, 1993;Souto et al, 2007). Through adaptation to facilitate gumnivory on large vertical tree trunks, marmosets have become quite derived relative to other primates (Lacher et al, 1984;Sussman and Kinzey, 1984;Garber, 1992;Hamrick, 1998;Vinyard et al, 2009;Young, 2009;Smith and Smith, 2013). In contrast to most other extant primates, marmosets have claw-like tegulae, rather than flat nails, on all digits except the hallux, and have a relatively short, adducted hallux with diminished intrinsic musculature (Beattie, 1927;Midlo, 1934;Szalay and Dagosto, 1988;Hamrick, 1998).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We test these predictions by examining the gait dynamics of common marmosets moving over broad and narrow diameter supports (i.e., elevated poles). Although, through adaptation to gumnivory, marmosets have become quite derived relative to other primates (Sussman and Kinzey, ; Garber, ; Hamrick, ; Young, ; Smith and Smith, ), as small‐bodied arboreal quadrupeds with claw‐like tegulae on all digits except the hallux, marmosets, and other callitrichids have converged on the general morphotype thought to characterize the early stages of euprimate evolution (Szalay and Dagosto, ; Gebo, ; Bloch et al, ; Sargis et al, ). As such, empirical data on marmoset arboreal stability can serve as a baseline against which to evaluate balance performance in other, less‐derived primates that adhere more closely to the crown primate bauplan (e.g., an animal with fully developed grasping extremities).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Squirrel monkeys are primarily insectivorous, typically moving on small branches, twigs, and vines during foraging (i.e., substrates <5 cm in diameter: Fleagle et al, ; Boinski, ). In contrast, like all callitrichines, tamarins are specialized for exudativorous foraging, though they also exploit a variety of resources beyond tree exudates, including fruits and insects (Sussman and Kinzey, ; Vinyard et al, ; Smith and Smith, ). In association with exudativory, tamarins most often travel on large branches and boughs (i.e., 6–10 cm in diameter), though they also exploit relatively small diameter supports (i.e., <1.5 cm) during other feeding activities (Garber, , ; Garber and Sussman, ; Sussman and Kinzey, ; Garber, ; Nyakatura and Heymann, ; Smith and Smith, ).…”
Section: Specific Aims and Hypothesesmentioning
confidence: 99%