Fatal Attack of a Boa constrictoron a Bearded Saki (Chiropotes satanas utahicki)

Ferrari, Stephen F.; Pereira, Washington Luiz Assunção; Santos, Ricardo Rodrigues dos; Veiga, Liza M.

doi:10.1159/000076272

Cited by 34 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(i) Snakes have killed 2 species of tree shrews (17,19); at least 6 species of strepsirrhines, including 3 species of lemurs (20)(21)(22), 2 species of galagos (23)(24)(25), and a slow loris (Nycticebus coucang) (26); and 20 species of nonhuman haplorhines, including a spectral tarsier (Tarsius spectrum) (27), 8 species of New World monkeys (13,(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35), 10 species of Old World monkeys (17,(36)(37)(38)(39)(40)(41)(42)(43)(44)(45), and a siamang (Hylobates syndactylus) (46). Primates have been ambushed as they descended from trees [e.g., boa constrictor (Boa constrictor) on a white-faced capuchin (Cebus capucinus)] (28), as they passed over water on vegetation [e.g., green anaconda (Eunectes murinus) on a black-chested mustached tamarin (Saguinus mystax)] (29), and from trailside or overhead in trees (reticulated pythons on humans); juveniles have been snatched from their mothers [Madagascan ground boa (Acrantophis madagascariensis) on Verraux's sifaka (Propithecus verreauxi)] (21) or eaten with them (reticulated python on longtailed macaque) (44) as well as taken by foraging into shelters (reticulated pythons on humans).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hunter–gatherers and other primates as prey, predators, and competitors of snakes

Headland

Greene

2011

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relationships between primates and snakes are of widespread interest from anthropological, psychological, and evolutionary perspectives, but surprisingly, little is known about the dangers that serpents have posed to people with prehistoric lifestyles and nonhuman primates. Here, we report ethnographic observations of 120 Philippine Agta Negritos when they were still preliterate hunter–gatherers, among whom 26% of adult males had survived predation attempts by reticulated pythons. Six fatal attacks occurred between 1934 and 1973. Agta ate pythons as well as deer, wild pigs, and monkeys, which are also eaten by pythons, and therefore, the two species were reciprocally prey, predators, and potential competitors. Natural history data document snake predation on tree shrews and 26 species of nonhuman primates as well as many species of primates approaching, mobbing, killing, and sometimes eating snakes. These findings, interpreted within the context of snake and primate phylogenies, corroborate the hypothesis that complex ecological interactions have long characterized our shared evolutionary history.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hunter–gatherers and other primates as prey, predators, and competitors of snakes

Headland

Greene

2011

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mammals (including other primates), birds and snakes all predate Neotropical primates (Ferrari 2009;Sousa-Alves et al 2011). Five primate-eating felids occur at Jaú (jaguar Panthera onca, jaguarondi Puma yagouaroundi, margay Felis weidii, ocelot Leopardus pardalis, puma P. concolor: Calleia et al 2008), as do tayra (Eira barbara: Mustelidae), and large snakes such as Boa constrictor (both known primate predators: Bezerra et al 2009;Ferrari et al 2004). However, flooded igapó is not a predator-rich environment (Gudger 1946;Wallace et al 1998;Haugaasen and Peres 2007).…”

Section: Avoidance Of Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sleeping site selection by golden-backed uacaris, Cacajao melanocephalus ouakary (Pitheciidae), in Amazonian flooded forests

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Amazonian seasonally flooded forest (igapó), golden-backed uacaris, Cacajao melanocephalus ouakary, show high selectivity for sleeping trees. Of 89 tree species in igapó, only 16 were used for sleeping (18%). Hydrochorea marginata (Fabaceae) and Ormosia paraensis (Fabaceae) were used most frequently (41% of records) despite being uncommon (Ivlev electivity ratios were 0.76, and 0.84, respectively), though the third most commonly used species (11%), Amanoa oblongifolia (Euphorbiaceae), was selected at near parity. All three species have broad, open canopies with large horizontal limbs and uncluttered interiors. Compared with random trees, sleeping trees had above average diameter at breast height (DBH) and height, lacked lianas and wasp nests, and were more frequently within 5 m of open water. Uacaris generally slept one adult per tree or widely separated in the same canopy and on the outer third of the branch. These behaviours are interpreted as maximising detection of both aerial and arboreal predators.

show abstract

“…Several reports have now been published regarding predation and predation attempts by constricting snakes, especially the boa constrictor (Boa constrictor) and the anaconda (Eunectes murinus) , against both cebids and callitrichids [Chapman, 1986;Heymann, 1987;Tello et al, 2002;Perry et al, 2003;Ferrari et al, 2004]. Bartecki and Heymann [1987] observed a group of saddle-back tamarins (S. fuscicollis nigrifrons) mob a pair of Amazon tree boas (Corallus enydris) ; they suggested that mobbing achieved social transmission of information about potential predators [see also Passamani, 1995].…”

Section: Constricting Snakesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The predation-cathemerality link among ceboid populations is more likely affected by a release from predation by birds of prey. Constricting snakes in both biogeographic regions are known to prey on primates [Rakotondravony et al, 1998;Burney, 2002;Ferrari et al, 2004], but their possible impact on primate cathemerality is diffi cult to assess at this point. Human predation of cathemeral lemurids and ceboids will not be considered in this paper.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predation and Cathemerality

Colquhoun

2006

IJFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The removal, or absence, of predatory species could be a contributing proximate factor to the rise of primate cathemerality. But predators themselves can also be cathemeral, so cathemerality could well be an evolutionary stable strategy. From a comparative perspective, it appears that the effect of predatory species cannot provide a unitary explanation for cathemerality. Varying distributions and population densities of predators, especially raptors, may be key factors in owl monkey (Aotus) cathemerality, but temperature and lunar cycle variation have also been implicated. In Madagascar, while raptors are potential predators of lemur species, the cathemerality of Eulemur species coincides with that of the fossa (Cryptoprocta ferox), a major predatory threat to lemurs. Thus, lemurid cathemerality may be more parsimoniously explained as an evolutionary stable strategy.

show abstract

Fatal Attack of a Boa constrictoron a Bearded Saki (Chiropotes satanas utahicki)

Cited by 34 publications

References 13 publications

Hunter–gatherers and other primates as prey, predators, and competitors of snakes

Hunter–gatherers and other primates as prey, predators, and competitors of snakes

Sleeping site selection by golden-backed uacaris, Cacajao melanocephalus ouakary (Pitheciidae), in Amazonian flooded forests

Predation and Cathemerality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About