The role of leaf toughness on foraging efficiency in Angola black and white colobus monkeys (<i>Colobus angolensis palliatus</i>)

Dunham, Noah T; Lambert, Alexander L.

doi:10.1002/ajpa.23036

Cited by 19 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 79 publications

(136 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mismatches have been observed between proboscis monkey fruit feeding activity and seeds detected in faeces [Matsuda et al, 2013]. Primates, including proboscis monkeys, usually avoid feeding on tough leaves or leaf parts [Hill and Lucas, 1996;Teaford et al, 2006;Dunham and Lambert, 2016;Matsuda et al, 2017]. The same pattern is observed in chimpanzees where fallback foods are significantly tougher than preferred items (fruits) [Vogel et al, 2008].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Faecal Particle Size in Free-Ranging Proboscis Monkeys, Nasalis larvatus: Variation between Seasons

Thiry¹,

Clauss²,

Stark³

et al. 2018

IJFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reducing the size of food particles is crucial for herbivores. Seasonal dietary changes are known to influence animals’ chewing efficiency. Proboscis monkeys (Nasalis larvatus) are foregut fermenters, with a high chewing efficiency allowing them to achieve very fine faecal particles. In this study, we investigated how proboscis monkeys’ chewing efficiency varies between wet and dry seasons, hypothesising differences possibly related to diet change. Faecal particle size analysis is an established approach to estimate chewing efficiency in mammalian herbivores. We analysed 113 proboscis monkey faecal samples collected in the Lower Kinabatangan Wildlife Sanctuary, between 2015 and 2017. By following standard sieve analysis protocols, we measured a mean particle size MPS_0.025–8 of 0.45 ± 0.14 mm, and confirmed a previous result that proboscis monkeys have a very low faecal MPS. This study highlights a seasonal influence on proboscis monkeys’ chewing efficiency, with smaller MPS (better chewing efficiency) during the wet season. During that time of the year, individuals may potentially change their diet, as all faecal samples contained intact seeds. Whether the seasonal MPS difference in proboscis monkeys is smaller than in other colobines due to their “rumination” strategy remains to be investigated.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Faecal Particle Size in Free-Ranging Proboscis Monkeys, Nasalis larvatus: Variation between Seasons

Thiry¹,

Clauss²,

Stark³

et al. 2018

IJFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A multilevel society with predominantly MMUs may have originated from the merger of ancestral solitary units, as presumed for the emergence of Rhinopithecus multilevel societies, or alternatively via the sub‐structuring of multimale‐multifemale groups (Grueter & van Schaik, 2010; Grueter et al, 2012). Among the five species of black‐and‐white colobus, unit structure is quite heterogeneous, and MMUs are relatively common, having been observed in all five species, across varied environments from eastern to western Africa (Dunham & Lambert, 2016; Fashing, 2001a; Fleury & Gautier‐Hion, 1999; Korstjens, Nijssen, & Noe, 2005; Teichroeb & Sicotte, 2009). However, the Angolan black‐and‐white colobus subspecies inhabiting the dry coastal forests of Kenya and Tanzania ( Colobus angolensis palliatus ) forms small groups of 2–13 individuals, and MMUs are less frequently seen than the central and western African colobines (Dunham & Lambert, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the five species of black‐and‐white colobus, unit structure is quite heterogeneous, and MMUs are relatively common, having been observed in all five species, across varied environments from eastern to western Africa (Dunham & Lambert, 2016; Fashing, 2001a; Fleury & Gautier‐Hion, 1999; Korstjens, Nijssen, & Noe, 2005; Teichroeb & Sicotte, 2009). However, the Angolan black‐and‐white colobus subspecies inhabiting the dry coastal forests of Kenya and Tanzania ( Colobus angolensis palliatus ) forms small groups of 2–13 individuals, and MMUs are less frequently seen than the central and western African colobines (Dunham & Lambert, 2016). In Kakamega Forest, Kenya, most groups of guerezas are multi‐male, and groups often have overlapping home ranges (Fashing, 2001a).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal association patterns in a supergroup of Rwenzori black‐and‐white colobus (Colobus angolensis ruwenzorii) are consistent with a multilevel society

Miller

Uddin

Judge

et al. 2020

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Primates display broad diversity in their social organization. The social groups of a few primate species are organized in a multilevel fashion, with large groups composed of multiple, core one-male units (OMUs). A characteristic of multilevel societies is that the higher levels can include hundreds of individuals. The Rwenzori black-and-white colobus (Colobus angolensis ruwenzorii) in the montane forests of Rwanda form supergroups and have been suspected to exhibit multilevel social organization. Here we present the first data on the "anatomy" of a supergroup numbering 500+ individuals. We identified subgroups within the supergroup based on progression data, extracting the social network structure from the time-stamped spatiotemporal distribution of passing individuals identified to age-sex class, and selecting an optimal time window for each network using the two-step approach developed by Uddin, Choudhury, Farhad, and Rahman (2017). We detail the existence of core units-multi-male units (MMUs) with a mean of 1.7 adult males and 3.1 adult females, as well as OMUs, all-female units and bachelor units composed of adult and sub-adult males. More than two-thirds of units are MMUs. These grouping patterns conform to a multilevel society with predominantly multi-male core units, a social system that has recently also been described for a population of the same taxon in Uganda. Individual identification will be required to corroborate these interpretations. K E Y W O R D SColobus angolensis ruwenzorii, longitudinal social networks, multilevel societies, multi-male units, primates, Rwanda, social network analysis, spatiotemporal data streams

show abstract

“…Specifically, the material properties of foods are thought to influence the morphology of the masticatory system such that animals that feed on mechanically challenging foods should possess robust jaws that can withstand high magnitude bite forces and/or prolonged loading (e.g., Bouvier & Hylander, ; Hylander, , ; Ravosa, Scott, McAbee, Veit, & Fling, ; Ravosa, Vinyard, Gagnon, & Islam, ; Ross et al, ; Scott, McAbee, Eastman, & Ravosa, ; Taylor, ; Taylor, Vogel, & Dominy, ; Vogel et al, ). Many studies have reported on the material properties of primate foods (e.g., Coiner‐Collier et al, ; Dominy, Lucas, Osorio, & Yamashita, ; Dunham & Lambert, ; Elgart‐Berry, ; Hill & Lucas, ; Lucas, ; Teaford, Lucas, Ungar, & Glander, ; Venkataraman et al, ; Vogel et al, , ; Williams, Wright, Truong, Daubert, & Vinyard, ; Wright et al, ; Yamashita, ; Yamashita, Vinyard, & Tan, ), yet linking these data directly with masticatory morphology in a primate‐wide comparative context has proven difficult, largely due to the complex interactions among factors that produce adult masticatory morphology (e.g., feeding behavior, food mechanical and geometric properties, and loading regimes; Ross, Iriarte‐Diaz, & Nunn, ). Researchers have had better success linking food material properties and masticatory morphology within clades, particularly among the great apes (Taylor et al, ; Vogel et al, , ), which often serve as models for reconstructing hominin diets (e.g., Daegling & Grine, ; Robinson, , ; Smith et al, ; Strait et al, , ; Teaford & Ungar, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Toughness can be defined as the amount of energy needed to generate a crack of a given area (Ashby, ; Vincent, ). Despite the presumed ability to subsist on tough and fibrous foods, data on food material properties indicate that toughness of the mountain gorilla diet is unremarkable when compared to other primates (e.g., Chalk‐Wilayto, Ossi‐Lupo, & Raguet‐Schofield, ; Coiner‐Collier et al, ; Dunham & Lambert, ; McGraw et al, ; Quyet, Nguyen, Tai, Wright, & Covert, ; Teaford et al, ; Venkataraman et al, ; Vogel, Haag, Mitra‐Setia, van Schaik, & Dominy, ; Wright et al, ; Yamashita, ; Yamashita et al, , ), or the great apes in particular (Elgart‐Berry, ; Taylor et al, ; Vogel et al, , ). The toughness of the mountain gorilla diet may result from low plant toughness in the mountain gorilla environment or from mountain gorillas feeding selectively on foods of relatively low toughness.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toughness of the Virunga mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) diet across an altitudinal gradient

Glowacka

McFarlin

Vogel

et al. 2017

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The robust masticatory system of mountain gorillas is thought to have evolved for the comminution of tough vegetation, yet, compared to other primates, the toughness of the mountain gorilla diet is unremarkable. This may be a result of low plant toughness in the mountain gorilla environment or of mountain gorillas feeding selectively on low-toughness foods. The goal of this paper is to determine how the toughness of the mountain gorilla diet varies across their habitat, which spans a large altitudinal range, and whether there is a relationship between toughness and food selection by mountain gorillas. We collected data on the following variables to determine whether, and if so how, they change with altitude: leaf toughness of two plant species consumed by mountain gorillas, at every 100 m increase in altitude (2,600-3,700 m); toughness of consumed foods comprising over 85% of the gorilla diet across five vegetation zones; and toughness of unconsumed/infrequently consumed plant parts of those foods. Although leaf toughness increased with altitude, the toughness of the gorilla diet remained similar. There was a negative relationship between toughness and consumption frequency, and toughness was a better predictor of consumption frequency than plant frequency, biomass, and density. Consumed plant parts were less tough than unconsumed/infrequently consumed parts and toughness of the latter increased with altitude. Although it is unclear whether gorillas select food based on toughness or use toughness as a sensory cue to impart other plant properties (e.g., macronutrients, chemicals), our results that gorillas maintain a consistent low-toughness dietary profile across altitude, despite toughness increasing with altitude, suggest that the robust gorilla masticatory apparatus evolved for repetitive mastication of foods that are not high in toughness.

show abstract

The role of leaf toughness on foraging efficiency in Angola black and white colobus monkeys (Colobus angolensis palliatus)

Cited by 19 publications

References 79 publications

Faecal Particle Size in Free-Ranging Proboscis Monkeys, Nasalis larvatus: Variation between Seasons

Faecal Particle Size in Free-Ranging Proboscis Monkeys, Nasalis larvatus: Variation between Seasons

Spatiotemporal association patterns in a supergroup of Rwenzori black‐and‐white colobus (Colobus angolensis ruwenzorii) are consistent with a multilevel society

Toughness of the Virunga mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) diet across an altitudinal gradient

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About