Search for: All records

Two-toed sloths (genus Choloepus) are almost exclusively arboreal. However, they often descend to the ground in places known as mineral licks or “saladeros” and feed from soil, which presumably enhances their digestion of toxins and helps them obtain minerals not readily available in their diet. Mineral licks are risky areas which may increase their visitors’ vulnerability to predators. Here, we report a predation attempt on an adult Linnaeus two- toed sloth (Choloepus didactylus) by an adult ocelot (Leopardus pardalis) at a mineral lick at the Tiputini Biodi- versity Station in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Predation events are rarely recorded in camera traps, and this particular predation event can be considered unusual, given that sloths usually come down to mineral licks during the night. Also, it is not clear how ocelots are able to capture sloths, and other arboreal animals and this record evidence that predation of arboreal vertebrates by ocelots may also take place in the ground. Finally, the anti-predatory behavior displayed by the two-toed sloth demonstrates that there are intrinsic risks for predators while attempting to capture prey. 

Female mammals employ reproductive strategies (e.g., internal gestation) that result in power asymmetries specific to intersexual dyads. Because the number of eggs available for fertilization at any given time for most mammals is quite limited, having a fertilizable egg is potentially an important source of economic power for females. Control over mating opportunities is a source of intersexual leverage for female Verreaux’s sifaka ( Propithecus verreauxi ). We examined economic factors thought to influence the value of mating opportunities, and, thus, the extent of female leverage: kinship and market effects. Using a longitudinal dataset of agonistic interactions collected during focal animal sampling of all adult individuals in 10 social groups from 2008 to 2019, we tested the effects of relatedness, female parity, reproductive season, and adult sex ratio (population and group) on (1) the direction of submissive signaling and (2) which sex won a contested resource. While 96% of the acts of submission were directed from males toward females, females only won a third of their conflicts with males. Thus, our study has implications for evolutionary explanations of female-biased power. If female power evolved due to their greater need for food and other resources, then intersexual conflicts would be expected to result in males more consistently relinquishing control of resources. As expected, males were more likely to chatter submissively toward successful mothers, during the mating season, and when the sex ratio was male-biased. Although females generally had less power to win a conflict when their fertilizable egg was less valuable (when they were nulliparous or unsuccessful mothers or when interacting with male kin) and with an increasing female-bias in the sex ratio, this ability to win additionally was influenced by which sex initiated the conflict. Our study demonstrates that female leverage can be influenced by the supply and demand for mating opportunities, but evoking submission does not translate into winning a resource. Indeed, intersexual power is dynamic, contextual, and dependent on the individuals in the dyad. 

Abstract AimAmazonia hosts more tree species from numerous evolutionary lineages, both young and ancient, than any other biogeographic region. Previous studies have shown that tree lineages colonized multiple edaphic environments and dispersed widely across Amazonia, leading to a hypothesis, which we test, that lineages should not be strongly associated with either geographic regions or edaphic forest types. LocationAmazonia. TaxonAngiosperms (Magnoliids; Monocots; Eudicots). MethodsData for the abundance of 5082 tree species in 1989 plots were combined with a mega‐phylogeny. We applied evolutionary ordination to assess how phylogenetic composition varies across Amazonia. We used variation partitioning and Moran's eigenvector maps (MEM) to test and quantify the separate and joint contributions of spatial and environmental variables to explain the phylogenetic composition of plots. We tested the indicator value of lineages for geographic regions and edaphic forest types and mapped associations onto the phylogeny. ResultsIn the terra firme and várzea forest types, the phylogenetic composition varies by geographic region, but the igapó and white‐sand forest types retain a unique evolutionary signature regardless of region. Overall, we find that soil chemistry, climate and topography explain 24% of the variation in phylogenetic composition, with 79% of that variation being spatially structured (R² = 19% overall for combined spatial/environmental effects). The phylogenetic composition also shows substantial spatial patterns not related to the environmental variables we quantified (R² = 28%). A greater number of lineages were significant indicators of geographic regions than forest types. Main ConclusionNumerous tree lineages, including some ancient ones (>66 Ma), show strong associations with geographic regions and edaphic forest types of Amazonia. This shows that specialization in specific edaphic environments has played a long‐standing role in the evolutionary assembly of Amazonian forests. Furthermore, many lineages, even those that have dispersed across Amazonia, dominate within a specific region, likely because of phylogenetically conserved niches for environmental conditions that are prevalent within regions. 

Abstract Conservation funding is currently limited; cost‐effective conservation solutions are essential. We suggest that the thousands of field stations worldwide can play key roles at the frontline of biodiversity conservation and have high intrinsic value. We assessed field stations’ conservation return on investment and explored the impact of COVID‐19. We surveyed leaders of field stations across tropical regions that host primate research; 157 field stations in 56 countries responded. Respondents reported improved habitat quality and reduced hunting rates at over 80% of field stations and lower operational costs per km²than protected areas, yet half of those surveyed have less funding now than in 2019. Spatial analyses support field station presence as reducing deforestation. These “earth observatories” provide a high return on investment; we advocate for increased support of field station programs and for governments to support their vital conservation efforts by investing accordingly.