Biogeographic Variation in the Diet and Behaviour of Cercopithecus mitis

Abstract

Primate species are characterised by variation in foraging behaviour and dietary composition across their geographic range. Here we examine how ecological conditions account for variation in the behavioural ecology of a widespread arboreal guenon, Cercopithecus mitis. Although substantial variation existed in time budgets, group size, home range and day journey length, clear biogeographic patterns were not apparent. In contrast, dietary variation was correlated with underlying climatic conditions. Temperature seasonality, which tends to increase with latitude, was significantly positively related to the proportion of fruit in the diet and negatively related to the proportion of animal matter. Both dietary components were ‘preferred' foods, with the variability between populations reflecting the availability of different food types across their geographic range. Although we found no significant relationships between climate and the proportion of leaves in the diet, the ability for C. mitis to vary its diet to include a diversity of food types, and to incorporate a significant proportion of leaves when preferred sources are scarce, likely underpins its ability to survive across such a large distribution.

Dietary generalists and nutritional specialists: Feeding strategies of adult female blue monkeys (Cercopithecus mitis) in the Kakamega Forest, Kenya

“…C. mitis diets are variable in almost all food types across populations (Table S3; Chapman et al, ; Coleman & Hill, ). Compared with other guenons, C. mitis had the highest coefficient of variation for the percentage of time spent feeding on fruit and the second highest value for insects (Chapman et al, ).…”

“…Fruit constituted as much as 91% of the diet (Lawes et al, ) in one population and as little as 15% in another (Butynski, ). Much inter‐populational variation in the C. mitis diet relates to latitudinal variation, with more southerly populations eating relatively more insects and less fruit (Coleman & Hill, ).…”

“…Perhaps better characterized as omnivorous, they are generalist feeders that consume many types of food (Lawes et al, ), including plant parts from a wide variety of species (up to 104 species in a single population; Cords, ). The proportion of particular foods in the diet (based on feeding time and fecal analysis) varies widely among populations and over time (fruit: 28–91%, leaves: 2–52%, flowers: 0–14%, prey: 0–38%; Coleman & Hill, ). While it is clear that blue monkey diets are variable in terms of food types, it is not known how this variability relates to nutrient intake.…”

Influence of food availability, plant productivity, and indigenous forest use on ranging behavior of the endangered samango monkey (Cercopithecus albogularis schwarzi), in the Soutpansberg Mountains, South Africa

“…Their distribution is largely restricted to areas of tall-canopy, evergreen indigenous forests such as Afromontane/mistbelt, scarp, and coastal belt forests (Lawes 1990;Skinner & Chimimba 2005), which are becoming increasingly fragmented as a result of anthropogenic disturbance (Lawes 1992;Friedmann & Daly 2004;Kingdon et al 2008). They are primarily arboreal and form single-male, multifemale groups (Henzi & Lawes 1987), averaging around 30 individuals (Lawes et al 2013;Coleman & Hill 2014a). Unlike most other forest guenons, which are predominantly frugivorous (Lambert 2004), samango monkeys display considerable dietary flexibility and are able to consume large amounts of leaves (Coleman & Hill 2014a;Linden et al 2015;Parker 2019).…”

“…They are primarily arboreal and form single-male, multifemale groups (Henzi & Lawes 1987), averaging around 30 individuals (Lawes et al 2013;Coleman & Hill 2014a). Unlike most other forest guenons, which are predominantly frugivorous (Lambert 2004), samango monkeys display considerable dietary flexibility and are able to consume large amounts of leaves (Coleman & Hill 2014a;Linden et al 2015;Parker 2019). This is largely owing to their gut morphology and longer caecum (Bruorton & Perrin 1991), which facilitates the extraction of protein by breaking down cellulose in plant cell walls (Lawes et al 1990;Bruorton & Perrin 1991;Lawes 1991).…”