Mammal Research

, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 73–82 | Cite as

Local vs landscape drivers of primate occupancy in a Brazilian fragmented region

  • Lilian Patricia Sales
  • Matthew Warrington Hayward
  • Marcelo Passamani
Original Paper


Understanding the drivers of species distributions in human-dominated landscapes is crucial for proposing sound conservation strategies. Primates are the most studied terrestrial vertebrate taxa, yet still, their response to forest loss and fragmentation widely varies among species. In this paper, we assessed the relative influence of local vs landscape features on occupancy of two primate species—the black-fronted titi monkey and the black-pencilled marmoset, in a Brazilian fragmented region. We created detection histories by performing repeated auditory surveys on 25 native vegetation patches. Then, we fitted occupancy models using habitat and GIS-based data as site covariates and weather conditions as detection covariates. We found that forest-like canopy elements are important for the titi monkey, a canopy-dependent species. Occupancy of marmoset, an opportunistic species, was also related to local elements, but in a lesser extent. In addition, we found that ignoring detectability in playback call surveys created a 20 % difference in occupancy estimates for the marmoset. We conclude that drivers of primate occupancy at the studied landscape rely mainly on local key habitat elements, so that on-ground conservation actions should not focus on habitat amount alone. Furthermore, we reiterate that primate researchers should explicitly account for imperfect detection to avoid substantial detectability bias.


Conservation Wildlife habitat Detection Callicebus nigrifrons Callithrix penicillata 



We are sincerely thankful to all landowners who allowed us to work in their rural properties. Special thanks are given to Renan Macedo, Rayssa Faria Pedroso, Tiago Fogaça de Carvalho, and Ismael Aparecido da Silva for their valuable help in fieldwork. We also thank two anonymous referees for their valuable suggestions to the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Data collection was conducted under approval of the Brazilian Institute of the Environment (IBAMA process number 14083–1) and follows the Principles for the Ethical Treatment of Non-Human Primates of the American Society of Primatologists. Co-authors state their participation and agree with the resubmission in Mammal Research. The first author is financed by the Brazilian Federal Agency for Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES number 00.889.834/0001-08). The authors also declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

13364_2015_252_MOESM1_ESM.docx (22 kb)
Supl 1 (DOCX 21 kb)
13364_2015_252_MOESM2_ESM.docx (22 kb)
Supl 2 (DOCX 21 kb)


  1. Akaike H (1974) A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19:716–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson J, Cowlishaw G, Rowcliffe JM (2007) Effects of forest fragmentation on the abundance of Colobus angolensis palliatus in Kenya’s coastal forests. Int J Primatol 28:637–655. doi: 10.1007/s10764-007-9143-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arroyo-Rodríguez V, Dias PAD (2010) Effects of habitat fragmentation and disturbance on howler monkeys: a review. Am J Primatol 72:1–16. doi: 10.1002/ajp.20753 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arroyo-Rodríguez V, Fahrig L (2014) Why is a landscape perspective important in studies of primates? Am J Primatol 76:901–909. doi: 10.1002/ajp.22282 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arroyo-Rodríguez V, Mandujano S (2009) Conceptualization and measurement of habitat fragmentation from the primates’ perspective. Int J Primatol 30:497–514. doi: 10.1007/s10764-009-9355-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arroyo-Rodríguez V, Moral EC, Mandujano S et al (2013) Assessing habitat fragmentation effects on primates: the importance of evaluating questions at the correct scale. In: Marsh LK, Chapman CA (eds) Primates in fragments: complexity and resilience, 2nd edn. Springer New York, New York, pp 13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baker LR, Arnold TW, Olubode OS, Garshelis DL (2011) Considerations for using occupancy surveys to monitor forest primates: a case study with Sclater’s monkey (Cercopithecus sclateri). Popul Ecol 53:549–561. doi: 10.1007/s10144-011-0274-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barros M, Alencar C, Tomaz C (2004) Differences in aerial and terrestrial visual scanning in captive black tufted-ear marmosets (Callithrix penicillata) exposed to a novel environment. Folia Primatol 75:85–92. doi: 10.1159/000076266 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bélisle CJP (1992) Convergence theorems for a class of simulated annealing algorithms on R. J Appl Probab 29:885–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benchimol M, Peres CA (2013) Anthropogenic modulators of species-area relationships in Neotropical primates: a continental-scale analysis of fragmented forest landscapes. Divers Distrib 19:1339–1352. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12111 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Benchimol M, Peres CA (2014) Predicting primate local extinctions within “real-world” forest fragments: a pan-Neotropical analysis. Am J Primatol 76:289–302. doi: 10.1002/ajp.22233 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Broadbent EN, Asner GP, Keller M et al (2008) Forest fragmentation and edge effects from deforestation and selective logging in the Brazilian Amazon. Biol Conserv 141:1745–1757. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.04.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach, 2nd edn. Springer New York, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Caselli CB, Setz EZF (2011) Feeding ecology and activity pattern of black-fronted titi monkeys (Callicebus nigrifrons) in a semideciduous tropical forest of southern Brazil. Primates 52:351–359. doi: 10.1007/s10329-011-0266-2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chapman CA, Peres CA (2001) Primate conservation in the new millennium: the role of scientists. Evol Anthrop 10:16–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coimbra-Filho AF, Mittermeier RA (1976) Exudate-eating and tree-gouging in marmosets. Nature 262:630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Da Silva LG, Ribeiro MC, Hasui É et al (2015) Patch size, functional isolation, visibility and matrix permeability influences Neotropical primate occurrence within highly fragmented landscapes. PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0114025 Google Scholar
  18. Dacier A, de Luna AG, Fernandez-Duque E, Di Fiore A (2011) Estimating population density of Amazonian titi monkeys (Callicebus discolor) via playback point counts. Biotropica 43:135–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7429.2010.00749.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dantas A, Carvalho L, Ferreira E (2007) Classificação e tendências climáticas em Lavras, MG. Cienc Agrotecnol 31:1862–1866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dooley HM, Judge DS, Schmitt LH (2013) Singing by male and female kloss gibbons (Hylobates klossii) in the Peleonan Forest, Siberut Island, Indonesia. Primates 54:39–48. doi: 10.1007/s10329-012-0326-2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fiske IJ, Chandler RB (2011) Unmarked: an R package for fitting hierarchical models of wildlife occurrence and abundance. J Stat Softw 43:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Frazer G, Canham C, Lertzman K (1999) Gap light analyzer (GLA): imaging software to extract canopy structure and gap light transmission indices from true-colour fisheye photographs. User’s manual and program documentation, Version 2.0Google Scholar
  23. Gu W, Swihart RK (2004) Absent or undetected? Effects of non-detection of species occurrence on wildlife–habitat models. Biol Conserv 116:195–203. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3207(03)00190-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guillera-Arroita G, Lahoz-Monfort JJ, Milner-Gulland EJ et al (2010) Monitoring and conservation of the critically endangered alaotran gentle lemur Hapalemur alaotrensis. Madagascar Conserv Dev 5:103–109Google Scholar
  25. Guillera-Arroita G, Lahoz-Monfort JJ, MacKenzie DI et al (2014) Ignoring imperfect detection in biological surveys is dangerous: a response to “Fitting and interpreting occupancy models.”. PLoS One 9:e99571. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099571 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hines JE, Nichols JD, Karanth KK (2010) Occurrence and distribution of Indian primates. Biol Conserv 143:2891–2899. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Júnior TA, Zara FJ (2007) Black-tufted-ear marmoset Callithrix penicillata (Primates: Callithrichidae) following the army ant Labidus praedator (Formicidae: Ecitonina) in the Cerrado and the Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Neotrop Primates 14:32–33Google Scholar
  28. Keane A, Hobinjatovo T, Razafimanahaka HJ et al (2012) The potential of occupancy modelling as a tool for monitoring wild primate populations. Anim Conserv 15:457–465. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1795.2012.00575.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kinzey WG (1997) Part II: synopsis of new world primates. In: Kinzey WG (ed) New world primates – ecology, evolution, and behavior. Walter de Gruyter Inc., New York, NY, p 169–324Google Scholar
  30. Lahoz-Monfort JJ, Guillera-Arroita G, Wintle BA (2014) Imperfect detection impacts the performance of species distribution models. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 23:504–515. doi: 10.1111/geb.12138 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lawler RR, Ford SM, Wright PC, Easley SP (2006) The locomotor behavior of Callicebus brunneus and Callicebus torquatus. Folia Primatol 77:228–239. doi: 10.1159/000091232 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. MacKenzie DI, Bailey LL (2004) Assessing the fit of site-occupancy models. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 9:300–318. doi: 10.1198/108571104X3361 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB et al (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83:2248–2255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mandujano S, Escobedo-Morales LA, Palacios-Silva R et al (2006) A metapopulation approach to conserving the howler monkey in a highly fragmented landscape in Los Tuxtlas, Mexico. In: Estrada A, Garber PA, Pavelka MSM, Luecke L (eds) New perspectives in the study of Mesoamerican primates: distribution, ecology, behavior, and conservation. Springer New York, New York, pp 513–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Marsh LK, Chapman CA, Arroyo-Rodríguez V et al (2013) Primates in fragments 10 years later: once and future goals. In: Marsh LK, Chapman C (eds) Primates in fragments: complexity and resilience, 2nd edn. Springer New York, New York, pp 505–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mazerolle MJ (2015) Package “AICcmodavg”: model selection and multimodel inference based on (Q)AIC(c). Accessed 23 Aug 2015
  37. Melo FR, Mendes SL (2000) Emissão de gritos longos por grupos de Callicebus nigrifrons e suas reações a playbacks. In: Alonso C, Languth A (eds) A primatologia no brasil. SBPr e Editora Universitária, João Pessoa, pp 215–222Google Scholar
  38. Miller CT, Beck K, Meade B, Wang X (2009) Antiphonal call timing in marmosets is behaviorally significant: interactive playback experiments. J Comp Physiol A 195:783–789. doi: 10.1007/s00359-009-0456-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mittermeier RA, Rylands AB, Wilson DE (2013) Handbook of the mammals of the world. Vol. 3. Primates. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, SpainGoogle Scholar
  40. Mustoe AC, Jensen HA, French JA (2012) Describing ovarian cycles, pregnancy characteristics, and the use of contraception in female white-faced marmosets, Callithrix geoffroyi. Am J Primatol 74:1044–1053. doi: 10.1002/ajp.22058 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Nichols JD, Bailey LL, O’Connell AF Jr et al (2008) Multi-scale occupancy estimation and modelling using multiple detection methods. J Appl Ecol 45:1321–1329. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01509.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Norconk MA (2007) Sakis, uakaris and titi monkeys—behavioral diversity in a radiation of primate seed predators. In: Campbell CJ, Fuentes A, MacKinnon KC, Panger MBS (eds) Primates in perspective. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 123–138Google Scholar
  43. Norris D, Rocha-Mendes F, Marques R et al (2011) Density and spatial distribution of buffy-tufted-ear marmosets (Callithrix aurita) in a continuous Atlantic forest. Int J Primatol 32:811–829. doi: 10.1007/s10764-011-9503-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Oliveira-Filho AAT, Fontes MAL (2000) Patterns of floristic differentiation among Atlantic forests in Southeastern Brazil and the influence of climate. Biotropica 32:793–810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Oliveira-Filho A, Ratter J (2002) Vegetation physiognomies and woody flora of the Cerrado biome. In: Oliveira P, Marquis R (eds) The Cerrados of Brazil: ecology and natural history of a Neotropical savanna. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 91–120Google Scholar
  46. Oliveira-Filho AT, Vilela EA, Gavilanes ML, Carvalho DA (1994) Comparison of the woody flora and soils of six areas of montane semideciduous forest in southern Minas Gerais. Edinbg J Bot 51:355–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Passamani M, Rylands AB (2000) Feeding behavior of Geoffroy’s marmoset (Callithrix geoffroyi) in an Atlantic forest fragment of south-eastern Brazil. Primates 41:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pontin AJ (1962) A method for quick comparison of the total solar radiation incident on different microhabitats. Ecology 43:740. doi: 10.2307/1933468 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pozo-Montuy G, Serio-Silva JC, Bonilla-Sánchez YM (2011) Influence of the landscape matrix on the abundance of arboreal primates in fragmented landscapes. Primates 52:139–147. doi: 10.1007/s10329-010-0231-5 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ribeiro MC, Metzger JP, Martensen AC et al (2009) The Brazilian Atlantic Forest: how much is left, and how is the remaining forest distributed? Implications for conservation. Biol Conserv 142:1141–1153. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2009.02.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Robinson JG (1981) Vocal regulation of inter- and intragroup spacing during boundary encounters in the titi monkey, Callicebus moloch. Primates 22:161–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ryan MJ, Kime NM (2003) Selection on long-distance acoustic signals. In: Simmons AM, Fay RR, Popper AN (eds) Acoustic communication. Springer, New York, pp 225–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rylands AB, Anzenberger G (2012) Introduction: new world primates. Int Zoo Yearb 46:4–10. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-1090.2012.00182.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rylands AB, Mendes SL (2008) Callithrix penicillata. The IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2015.3. Accessed 23 Aug 2015
  55. Rylands AB, Coimbra-Filho AF, Mittermeier RA (2009) The systematics and distributions of the marmosets (Callithrix, Callibella, Cebuella, and Mico) and callimico (Callimico) (Callithrichidae, Primates). In: Ford SM, Porter LM, Davis LC (eds) The smallest anthropoids: the Marmoset/Callimico radiation. Springer Science + Business Media, p 25–61. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0293-1_2
  56. Schuster C, Förster M, Kleinschmit B (2012) Testing the red edge channel for improving land-use classifications based on high-resolution multi-spectral satellite data. Int J Remote Sens 33:5583–5599. doi: 10.1080/01431161.2012.666812 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sharma N, Madhusudan MD, Sinha A (2014) Local and landscape correlates of primate distribution and persistence in the remnant lowland rainforests of the upper Brahmaputra Valley, Northeastern India. Conserv Biol 28:95–106. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12159 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sussman RW, Kinzey WG (1984) The ecological role of the callitrichidae: a review. Am J Phys Anthropol 64:419–449. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330640407 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tabarelli M, Aguiar AV, Ribeiro MC et al (2010) Prospects for biodiversity conservation in the Atlantic Forest: lessons from aging human-modified landscapes. Biol Conserv 143:2328–2340. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2010.02.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tardif S, Smucny D (2003) Reproduction in captive common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus). Comp Med 53:364–368PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Trevelin LC, Port-carvalho M, Silveira M et al (2007) Abundance, habitat use and diet of Callicebus nigrifrons Spix (Primates, Pitheciidae) in Cantareira State Park, São Paulo, Brazil. Rev Bras Zool 24:1071–1077CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Umapathy G (2013) Research in habitat fragmentation: are we moving in the right direction? J Primatol. doi: 10.4172/2167-6801.1000e119 Google Scholar
  63. Van Roosmalen MGM, Van Roosmalen T, Mittermeier RA (2002) A taxonomic review of the titi monkeys, genus Callicebus Thomas, 1903, with the description of two new species, Callicebus bernhardi and Callicebus stephennashi, from Brazilian Amazonia. Neotrop Primates 10:1–50Google Scholar
  64. Veiga LM, Kierulff CM, de Oliveira MM, Mendes SL (2008) Callicebus nigrifrons. The IUCN red list of threatened species. Version 2015.3. Accessed 23 Aug 2015
  65. Vilela AA, Del-claro K (2011) Feeding behavior of the black-tufted-ear marmoset (Callithrix penicillata) (Primate, Callitrichidae) in a tropical Cerrado savanna. Sociobiology 58:1–6Google Scholar
  66. Villela DM, Nascimento MT, Aragao LEOC, da Gama DM (2006) Effect of selective logging on forest structure and nutrient cycling in a seasonally dry Brazilian Atlantic forest. J Biogeogr 33:506–516. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2005.01453.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wiley RH, Richards DG (1978) Physical constraints on acoustic communication in the atmosphere: implications for the evolution of animal vocalizations. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 3:69–94. doi: 10.1007/BF00300047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wintle BA, McCarthy MA, Parris KM, Burgman MA (2004) Precision and bias of methods for estimating point survey detection probabilities. Ecol Appl 14:703–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Białowieża, Poland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Conservation Biogeography Lab, Ecology DepartmentFederal University of GoiásGoiâniaBrazil
  2. 2.School of Environment, Natural Resources and GeographyBangor UniversityBangorUK
  3. 3.Biology DepartmentFederal University of LavrasLavrasBrazil

Personalised recommendations