Colin P. Groves

Asian Primate Classification

In the foreseeable future there is little likelihood of achieving consensus on the number of Asian primate genera and species, and their subspecific composition. There is a more realistic hope of reaching agreement on the number of recognizable subspecies. The latter objective is more urgent because in order to reliably assess generic and specific numbers, it is essential that effective conservation measures are implemented for as many subspecies as possible. This cannot be comprehensively accomplished until their validity is assessed and they are satisfactorily established and defined. The Asian primate classification that we present is the outcome of electronic communication among the co-authors after a workshop, which was especially convened to attempt to determine the number of recognizable primate subspecies and to identify potentially recognizable subspecies. The generic and specific arrangement is a compromise that does not necessarily reflect the individual views of the co-authors: 183 subspecies in 77 species in 16 genera. The 31 subspecies allotted a low credibility rating are almost balanced by the 22 scientifically unnamed populations that may warrant subspecific status.

Assessment of the diversity of African primates

This account of the systematics of African primates is the consensus view of a group of authors who attended the Workshop of the IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group held at Orlando, Florida, in February 2000. We list all species and subspecies that we consider to be valid, together with a selected synonymy for all names that have been controversial in recent years or that have been considered to be valid by other authors in recent publications. For genera, species-groups or species, we tabulate and discuss different published systematic interpretations, with emphasis on more recent publications. We explain why we have adopted our taxonomic treatment and give particular attention to cases where more research is urgently required and in which systematic changes are most likely to be made. For all taxa, from suborder to subspecies, we provide English names.

Estimating the phylogeny and divergence times of primates using a supermatrix approach

BackgroundThe primates are among the most broadly studied mammalian orders, with the published literature containing extensive analyses of their behavior, physiology, genetics and ecology. The importance of this group in medical and biological research is well appreciated, and explains the numerous molecular phylogenies that have been proposed for most primate families and genera. Composite estimates for the entire order have been infrequently attempted, with the last phylogenetic reconstruction spanning the full range of primate evolutionary relationships having been conducted over a decade ago.ResultsTo estimate the structure and tempo of primate evolutionary history, we employed Bayesian phylogenetic methods to analyze data supermatrices comprising 7 mitochondrial genes (6,138 nucleotides) from 219 species across 67 genera and 3 nuclear genes (2,157 nucleotides) from 26 genera. Many taxa were only partially represented, with an average of 3.95 and 5.43 mitochondrial genes per species and per genus, respectively, and 2.23 nuclear genes per genus. Our analyses of mitochondrial DNA place Tarsiiformes as the sister group of Strepsirrhini. Within Haplorrhini, we find support for the primary divergence of Pitheciidae in Platyrrhini, and our results suggest a sister grouping of African and non-African colobines within Colobinae and of Cercopithecini and Papionini within Cercopthecinae. Date estimates for nodes within each family and genus are presented, with estimates for key splits including: Strepsirrhini-Haplorrhini 64 million years ago (MYA), Lemuriformes-Lorisiformes 52 MYA, Platyrrhini-Catarrhini 43 MYA and Cercopithecoidea-Hominoidea 29 MYA.ConclusionWe present an up-to-date, comprehensive estimate of the structure and tempo of primate evolutionary history. Although considerable gaps remain in our knowledge of the primate phylogeny, increased data sampling, particularly from nuclear loci, will be able to provide further resolution.

Lemur diversity in Madagascar

A basic understanding of the taxonomy, diversity, and distributions of primates is essential for their conservation. This review of the status of the taxonomy of lemurs is based on a 5-d workshop entitled “Primate Taxonomy for the New Millennium,” held at the Disney Institute, Orlando, Florida, in February 2000. The aim is not to present a taxonomic revision, but to review our current understanding of the diversity and current and past ranges of lemurs and indicate where there is controversy, discrepancy, or lack of knowledge. Our goal therefore is to provide a baseline for future taxonomic investigation, as well as a clearer focus for research and conservation priorities. We here focus on the lemurs of Madagascar and recognize 5 families, 15 genera, and 99 species and subspecies. We list 39 species of lemurs described since 2000: 2 dwarf lemurs, Cheirogaleus; 11 mouse lemurs, Microcebus; a giant mouse lemur, Mirza; a bamboo lemur, Hapalemur; 17 sportive lemurs, Lepilemur; and 7 woolly lemurs, Avahi. Taxonomic revisions have resulted in the resurrection of a further 9 taxa. However, the figures do not represent the total diversity of Malagasy lemurs because more new species are being identified via new field studies and accompanying genetic research, and should be described in the near future.

Phylogenetic and population systematics of the Mangabeys (primates: Cercopithecoidea)

On the basis of original craniological studies, it is concluded that recently published claims based on blood proteins that the Mangabeys are diphletic are valid, and it is proposed to divide them into two distinct genera:Cercocebus (with three species:torquatus (includingatys),agilis, andgaleritus), which belongs to the Cercocebini but has a somewhat isolated position in this tribe, andLophocebus (with one species,albigena: includingaterrimus as a subspecies), which is closer toPapio. The inter-relationships within each genus are discussed, with particular reference to the problem of subspeciesvs. allopatric species. A new subspecies is named and described,Lophocebus albigena osmani, and the anomalous position of the poorly-known subspeciesL.a. opdenboschi is extensively discussed.

Catalogue of primates in the British Museum (natural history) and elsewhere in the British isles. Part III. Family cercopithecidae, subfamily colobinae

This is the third in a series of catalogues of the primates in the British Museum collections. Prue Napier, having now retired, will presumably not be the author (or, at any rate, the sole author) of the volumes yet to come; and whoever compiles the remaining volumes has been set a very high standard-Prue Napier will be a hard act to follow. If Part I (New World monkeys) was somewhat spartan, if solid and businesslike, Part II (Cercopithecinae) began to spread its wings, and in Part III we have what amounts to a full taxonomic survey to date of the Colobinae. The catalogue goes beyond just the British Museum, important though the collection is. As far as possible, all the noteworthy collections of the British Isles have been included. The most significant of these is the Powell-Cotton Museum in Kent--a two-hour train ride from London. Discovered (primatologically speaking) by John Napier and Eric Ashton some 30 years ago, and increasingly used by the primatological community since then, its full richness has still not been appreciated by most anatomists and taxonomists. These catalogues will help to bring the Powell-Cotton and other collections to the attention of such workers. In her arrangement, the author uses basically the old Simpson classification, as modified by some more recent authors (Napier and Napier, Thorington and Groves, Szalay and Delson). In many respects, therefore, the taxonomy has a conservative feel to it; but the state of the art is laid before the user, and the options are fully discussed, so that in the end the decision to be cautious seems to have been a wise one. In the very full discussions, she has gone to great pains to put every point of view, and to get the in-

A New Generic Name for the Hoolock Gibbon (Hylobatidae)

Contrary to usual practice, the generic nomen Bunopithecus is not applicable to hoolock gibbons. We recount the history of its application and explain why it is spurious. We supply a new generic name, list the characters and content of the genus, and compare it to the other 3 genera of the Hylobatidae.

Taxonomy and Distributions of Mesoamerican Primates

Geoffroy’s tamarin, a squirrel monkey, a night monkey, the white-throated capuchin, two or three species of howlingmonkey, and one or two spider monkeys comprise the primate fauna ofMiddle America, historically throughout the subtropical and tropical forests from about 24oN in Tamaulipas, Mexico, extending south along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico, through Central America to the border of Colombia and Panama. This is the simple description, and hides a remarkable, and still poorly understood, diversity of 7–9 species and up to 22 taxa,

The What, Why and How of Primate Taxonomy

Taxonomy has a well-defined role, which is much more than simply stamp-collecting and pigeon-holing. Species are the units of classification, biogeography and conservation; as such they must be defined as objectively as possible. The biological species concept, still widely used in biology, though predominantly by non-taxonomists and all too often misunderstood, is a process-based concept, which offers no criterion for the classification of allopatric populations beyond inference and hypothesis. The phylogenetic species concept—a pattern-based concept—is as nearly objective as we are likely to get. Amount of difference is not a criterion for recognizing species. It is not possible to insist on monophyly at the specific level, but it is mandatory for the higher categories (genus, family, etc.). The rank we assign to a given supraspecific category should be determined by its time depth.

Bonobos: Generalized Hominid Prototypes or Specialized Insular Dwarfs? [and Comments and Replies]

Neontological, biochemical, and paleontological data indicate that the bonobo, Pan paniscus, is a specialized form that possesses relatively small teeth, is quadrupedally adapted, and is only minimally sexually dimorphic. The various specializations of bonobos could be adaptations to ecological restrictions encountered in the terrestrial island of tropical forest that comprises their home range. Bonobos possess specializations quite different from those present in either Miocene apes or the earliest known hominids and should not be considered as suitable living models of the primitive hominoid or hominid condition.