Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T18:17:57.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using population surveys and models to reassess the conservation status of an endemic Amazonian titi monkey in a deforestation hotspot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 September 2022

Felipe Ennes Silva Open the ORCID record for Felipe Ennes Silva [Opens in a new window] ,
Luciana Gosi Pacca Open the ORCID record for Luciana Gosi Pacca [Opens in a new window] ,
Lisley Pereira Lemos ,
Almério Câmara Gusmão Open the ORCID record for Almério Câmara Gusmão [Opens in a new window] ,
Odair Diogo da Silva Open the ORCID record for Odair Diogo da Silva [Opens in a new window] ,
Júlio César Dalponte Open the ORCID record for Júlio César Dalponte [Opens in a new window] ,
Caetano L.B. Franco Open the ORCID record for Caetano L.B. Franco [Opens in a new window] ,
Marcelo Ismar Santana Open the ORCID record for Marcelo Ismar Santana [Opens in a new window] ,
Gerson Buss Open the ORCID record for Gerson Buss [Opens in a new window]  and
Hani R. El Bizri
Felipe Ennes Silva
Affiliation:
Mamirauá Institute for Sustainable Development, Research Group on Primate Biology and Conservation, Tefé, Amazonas, Brazil
Luciana Gosi Pacca
Affiliation:
Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, Centro Nacional de Pesquisa e Conservação de Primatas Brasileiros, Cabedelo, Paraíba, Brazil
Lisley Pereira Lemos
Affiliation:
Mamirauá Institute for Sustainable Development, Research Group on Primate Biology and Conservation, Tefé, Amazonas, Brazil
Almério Câmara Gusmão
Affiliation:
Instituto Estadual de Desenvolvimento da Educação Profissional de Rondônia, Pimenta Bueno, Brazil
Odair Diogo da Silva
Affiliation:
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Ambientais, Universidade Estadual do Mato Grosso, Cáceres, Brazil
Júlio César Dalponte
Affiliation:
Instituto para a Conservação dos Carnívoros Neotropicais (Pró-Carnívoros), Atibaia, Brazil
Caetano L.B. Franco
Affiliation:
Mamirauá Institute for Sustainable Development, Research Group on Geospatial Analysis, Environment and Amazonian Territories, Tefé, Brazil
Marcelo Ismar Santana
Affiliation:
Faculdade de Agronomia e Medicina Veterinária da Universidade de Brasília, Brasilia, Brazil
Gerson Buss
Affiliation:
Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade, Centro Nacional de Pesquisa e Conservação de Primatas Brasileiros, Cabedelo, Paraíba, Brazil
Hani R. El Bizri*
Affiliation:
School of Science, Engineering and Environment, University of Salford, Salford M5 4NT, UK
*
(Corresponding author, [email protected])
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Assessing the conservation status of species is essential for implementing appropriate conservation measures. A lack of evidence of threats, rather than showing an absence of impacts, could reflect a lack of studies on how human activities could result in species population declines. The range of Prince Bernhard's titi monkey Plecturocebus bernhardi is restricted to the Arc of Deforestation, a deforestation hotspot in south-eastern Amazonia. Despite this, it is categorized as Least Concern on the IUCN Red List. To reassess the conservation status of P. bernhardi, we carried out surveys during 2015–2017 to delimit the geographical distribution of the species and estimate its population density and abundance. We then used spatial predictive modelling to examine future habitat and population loss within its range. Plecturocebus bernhardi occurs over an area of 131,295 km2. Its mean group size was 2.8 individuals/group and its density 10.8 individuals/km2 and 3.8 groups/km2. Habitat loss was estimated to be 58,365 km2 (44.5% of its current range) over the next 24 years (three P. bernhardi generations) under a conservative governance model of deforestation and 105,289 km2 (80.2%) under a business-as-usual model. These numbers indicate that P. bernhardi is threatened and should be categorized as Vulnerable, at least, using the IUCN Red List criteria. We recommend the reassessment of other Least Concern primate species from the Arc of Deforestation using a similar approach.

Keywords

Amazon rainforestArc of Deforestationconservation statushabitat lossIUCN Red ListLeast ConcernPlecturocebus bernhardiprimate conservation
Type
Article
Information
Oryx , Volume 56 , Issue 6 , November 2022 , pp. 846 - 853
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International

Introduction

Assessments of species conservation status at the global level follow the IUCN Red List categories and criteria and are fundamental for the implementation of strategies for species conservation. A taxon that does not meet any criteria for the IUCN threat categories is categorized as Least Concern (IUCN, 2012). This classification, however, does not necessarily imply that the taxon has been assessed fully for all criteria because, in most cases, there are insufficient data available regarding threats, distribution and/or population trends. When an assessment states there is no evidence of threats this does not necessarily mean studies were carried out that provide evidence the species is not in decline or not being affected by anthropogenic activities. Often the final decision rests on the judgement of specialists based on the available data (Mace et al., Reference Mace, Collar, Gaston, Hilton-Taylor, Akçakaya and Leader-Williams2008). However, Least Concern species should be reassessed if they become exposed to threats that have not been previously recognized or investigated (McLeod, Reference McLeod2010; Sengupta & Radhakrishna, Reference Sengupta and Radhakrishna2013; Erinjery et al., Reference Erinjery, Kumar, Kumara, Mohan, Dhananjaya and Sundararaj2017; de la Torre et al., Reference de la Torre, González-Maya, Zarza, Ceballos and Medellín2018; Silva et al., Reference Silva, Endo, Silva, Santos, Sampaio and Röhe2018).

This could be the case for mammals currently categorized as Least Concern and occurring in South America, where there is considerable concern for the conservation of habitats and species in the near future. For example, the lesser anteater Tamandua tetradactyla could lose > 76% of its habitat by 2050 in Bolivia because of climate and land-cover changes (Osipova & Sangermano, Reference Osipova and Sangermano2016). Such a rate of habitat reduction fulfils the criteria for a categorization as Endangered on the IUCN Red List, but this species is currently categorized as Least Concern (Miranda et al., Reference Miranda, Fallabrino, Arteaga, Tirira, Meritt and Superina2014). The situation could be similar for other Least Concern xenarthrans (anteaters, sloths and armadillos) in South America, which are facing threats related not only to changes to their habitats but also to hunting, collision with vehicles, diseases and other anthropogenic factors that could cause large population decreases (Superina & Abba, Reference Superina and Abba2020).

Several Amazonian primate species occurring in the Arc of Deforestation (a deforestation hotspot in south-eastern Amazonia) could potentially decline in the near future as a result of habitat loss (Silva et al., Reference Silva, Endo, Silva, Santos, Sampaio and Röhe2018, Reference Silva, el Bizri, Gonçalves, Lemos, Costa-Araújo and Lima2020; Sales et al., Reference Sales, Ribeiro, Pires, Chapman and Loyola2019; Rabelo et al., Reference Rabelo, Gonçalves, Silva, Rocha, Canale, Bernardo and Boubli2020). For example, current rates of deforestation in southern Amazonia are predicted to reduce the habitat of the marmoset Mico chrysoleucos by 38–54% over 18 years (three marmoset generations; Silva et al., Reference Silva, Endo, Silva, Santos, Sampaio and Röhe2018). Although c. 20% of its range is safeguarded by protected areas and Indigenous land designations (Silva et al., Reference Silva, Endo, Silva, Santos, Sampaio and Röhe2018), these rates of habitat loss are warning signs for the conservation of M. chrysoleucos considering the threats to the Amazon rainforest under the current government administration in Brazil. Unfortunately, however, this information was not included in the current IUCN Red List assessment and the species is still categorized as Least Concern (Röhe & Mittermeier, Reference Röhe and Mittermeier2021).

A similar situation could exist for Amazonian titi monkeys (Cheracebus and Plecturocebus; sensu Byrne et al., Reference Byrne, Rylands, Carneiro, Alfaro, Bertuol and da silva2016), for which there is little information regarding threats, distribution or populations. Of the 31 species of Amazonian titi monkeys assessed for the IUCN Red List, 19 (61%) are categorized as Least Concern, with the justification that they have relatively large ranges, occur in protected areas and/or because there is no evidence of threats to their populations. Titi monkeys are mostly frugivorous, occur in a variety of forest types (which include primary and secondary forests) and are considered tolerant of forest disturbance (Michalski & Peres, Reference Michalski and Peres2005; Bicca-Marques & Heymann, Reference Biccca-Marques, Heymann, Veiga, Barnett, Ferrari and Norconk2013). Nevertheless, at least seven Plecturocebus species occur in the Arc of Deforestation (Malhi et al., Reference Malhi, Roberts, Betts, Killeen, Wenhong and Nobre2008), indicating they could potentially be threatened, and also unprotected.

Extensions of the known range of Amazonian titi monkeys have been reported in Brazil (Monção et al., Reference Monção, Selhorst and Soares-Filho2008; Quintino & Bicca-Marques, Reference Quintino and Bicca-Marques2013; Printes et al., Reference Printes, Buss, Azevedo, Ravetta and Silva2018; Rocha et al., Reference Rocha, Barnett and Spironello2019), Bolívia (Martinez & Wallace, Reference Martinez and Wallace2021) and Peru (Vermeer et al., Reference Vermeer, Tello-Alvarado, Moreno-Moreno and Guerra-Vásquez2011), with new reports of sympatry (Printes et al., Reference Printes, Buss, Azevedo, Ravetta and Silva2018; Rocha et al., Reference Rocha, Barnett and Spironello2019) showing that the geographical distribution of Amazonian titi monkeys is more complex than was previously thought. Prince Bernhard's titi monkey Plecturocebus bernhardi (Plate 1) is one such example. The range of the species was believed to be limited to the west by the Ji-Paraná River but new records on the west bank of this river indicate the distribution of this species is greater than previously thought (van Roosmalen et al., Reference van Roosmalen, van Roosmalen and Mittermeier2002; Monção et al., Reference Monção, Selhorst and Soares-Filho2008; Quintino & Bicca-Marques, Reference Quintino and Bicca-Marques2013, Silva-Diogo et al., Reference Silva-Diogo, Costa, Almeida and Fermiano2018). Plecturocebus bernhardi is categorized as Least Concern because of its relatively large range and lack of evident threats that would result in population decline (Röhe & Boubli, Reference Röhe and Boubli2018). However, data regarding the population of this species and the threats it faces are lacking. Here we present new occurrence data and the first population survey of P. bernhardi. We use predictive spatial modelling to estimate the extent of loss of its habitat and population under two future scenarios of land use (a more conservative governance scenario and a more realistic business-as-usual scenario) to reassess the conservation status of the species. This is the first study to reassess the conservation status of an Amazonian titi monkey by gathering new population data and using remote sensing information to model current and future habitat loss.

Plate 1 Prince Bernhard's titi monkey Plecturocebus bernhardi. Photo: Marcelo Santana.

Study area

The study area is in the south of the Amazon Rainforest and encompasses the Madeira–Aripuanã interfluve and both banks of the Ji-Paraná River to the Guaporé Valley (Monção et al., Reference Monção, Selhorst and Soares-Filho2008; Fig. 1, Table 1). This region includes the borders between Amazonas, Rondônia and Mato Grosso states and lies in the Arc of Deforestation, a deforestation hotspot in the Brazilian Amazon as a result of the expansion of agriculture and cattle ranching, urban encroachment, logging and infrastructure projects (Carrero et al., Reference Carrero, Fearnside, do Valle and Alves2020). The climate is tropical with a mean annual temperature of 28 °C and annual precipitation of 2,500–3,000 mm (Hayakawa & Rossetti, Reference Hayakawa and Rossetti2015). The vegetation is classified as dense lowland ombrophilous forest with seasonally flooded forests (Hayakawa & Rossetti, Reference Hayakawa and Rossetti2015).

Fig. 1 The areas surveyed in this study (A-G) and the records of P. bernhardi. Numbers indicate the locality records of P. bernhardi recorded in this study and obtained from the literature (Supplementary Table 1). ILs, Indigenous lands; PAs, protected areas.

Table 1 The seven sites surveyed in the Madeira–Aripuanã interfluve and Ji-Paraná River for Prince Bernhard's titi monkey Plecturocebus bernhardi (Fig. 1).

Methods

Geographical distribution

We gathered locality records from the literature and from our primate surveys carried out during 2012–2015 at seven sites in the Madeira–Aripuanã interfluve and on both banks of upper Ji-Paraná River (Silva-Diogo et al., Reference Silva-Diogo, Costa, Almeida and Fermiano2018; Silva et al., Reference Silva, el Bizri, Gonçalves, Lemos, Costa-Araújo and Lima2020; Fig. 1, Table 1). After plotting all occurrence points using QGIS 3.20.1 (QGIS Development Team, 2021), we created a polygon with the major rivers (i.e. Roosevelt and Aripuanã Rivers to the east, Madeira River to the north and the lower Ji-Paraná River to the west) as the main barriers to the dispersal of the species within its geographical range (Amazonian rivers are considered to be barriers to the dispersal of titi monkeys; Ayres & Clutton-Brock, Reference Ayres and Clutton-Brock1992; Boubli et al., Reference Boubli, Ribas, Alfaro, Alfaro, da Silva, Pinho and Farias2015). We deducted non-forest and deforested areas from the species range to estimate the potential area of occurrence, considering that Neotropical primates are arboreal and associated with forests (Estrada et al., Reference Estrada, Garber, Rylands, Roos, Fernandez-Duque and Di Fiore2017).

Transect surveys

During January–February 2015 we carried out line transect surveys on 10 transects to estimate the population density and abundance of P. bernhardi. These transects were at two of the sites used for determining the species' geographical distribution (sites A and B in Fig. 1), in the northern portion of the study area. We positioned the transects randomly using QGIS, with each transect starting from a road or river. We oriented the transects perpendicular to road or river, to account for any gradient of environmental factors or primate density from the start of the trail to the interior of the forest. The mean length of the transects was 3.07 ± SD 0.63 km (range 2.0–4.0 km) and we placed them at least 2 km apart to guarantee spatial independence. We surveyed the transects during 07.00–11.00 in one direction and during 14.00–17.00 in the reverse direction and considered each survey during these periods of the day as independent sampling occasions. Two observers walked along the transects at a mean speed of 1.5 km/h and counted the number of individuals in each detected P. bernhardi group. We measured the perpendicular distance between the centre line of the transect and the centre of each detected group, to facilitate density estimates using distance sampling (Buckland et al., Reference Buckland, Anderson, Burnham and Lake1993). Considering walks during different periods of the day as our sampling occasions, we surveyed each transect at least eight times (mean 10, range 8–12), with at least four surveys in both morning and afternoon. We implemented a 2-day break between subsequent surveys to reduce the impact of observers on the detection rate. In total we walked 271.6 km along the transects.

We estimated the population density of P. bernhardi using Distance 7.1 (Thomas et al., Reference Thomas, Buckland, Rextad, Laake, Strindberg and Hedley2010). This analysis fits detection functions to perpendicular distances, providing the probability of detecting groups and estimating the number of individuals potentially missed by the observers. Following the method used by Silva et al. (Reference Silva, el Bizri, Gonçalves, Lemos, Costa-Araújo and Lima2020), we used a χ 2 test to determine the appropriate truncations and perpendicular distance intervals at P > 0.6. We then compared the adjustments of detection functions using the Akaike information criteria (AIC), with the models with the smallest AIC values considered as best fitting the data. We selected the model for which the density estimate had the lowest coefficient of variation (CV) when more than one function yielded a difference in AIC value (ΔAIC) < 2. We then estimated mean abundance, A, using A = D × a, whereby D is density and a is the species potential area of occurrence calculated using occurrence records (Supplementary Table 1). We calculated the 95% CI and the CV for all estimates.

Assessment of conservation status

We calculated the total habitat loss within the potential area of occurrence of P. bernhardi up to 2019. We used predictive deforestation models to assess how much habitat the species could lose over the next 24 years, which is equivalent to three titi monkey generations. This time frame of three generations is recommended for assessing population decline whether by direct observation, by measuring a decline in area of occupancy or extent of occurrence, or by measuring a decline in quality of habitat or other variables that can indicate ongoing population reduction (IUCN, 2012). We obtained data on current forest loss from MapBiomas (Reference MapBiomas2020) for 1995–2019. For predicted forest loss we considered two scenarios (after Soares-Filho et al., Reference Soares-Filho, Nepstad, Curran, Cerqueira, Garcia and Ramos2006; see also Boubli et al., Reference Boubli, Byrne, da Silva, Silva-Júnior, Araújo and Bertuol2019; Silva et al., Reference Silva, el Bizri, Gonçalves, Lemos, Costa-Araújo and Lima2020): (1) A governance scenario (i.e. considering the current deforestation trends but with a 50% cap in forest loss through the current laws being effective at preventing farmers from clearing > 50% of the forest on their properties and assuming that protected areas are managed effectively). (2) A business-as-usual scenario (i.e. with the continuation of the current deforestation trends along with poor management of protected areas).

To estimate the impact of habitat loss on the population of P. bernhardi, we used the lower bound of the CI of the estimate of abundance, which is the recommended measure of abundance for conservation status assessments (IUCN, 2012). We then used the Red List criteria (IUCN, 2012) to assess whether P. bernhardi should remain categorized as Least Concern or requires recategorization.

Results

Geographical distribution

We obtained 21 new locality records of P. bernhardi through our surveys, and 54 records from the literature (Fig. 1, Supplementary Table 1). The majority of the distribution of this species is delimited by the Aripuanã, Madeira and Ji-Paraná Rivers, but we also recorded the species on the west bank of the upper Ji-Paraná River, where its range overlaps with that of Plecturocebus brunneus (Supplementary Fig. 1), although we did not record these species in syntopy during our surveys. In the headwaters of the Ji-Paraná and Roosevelt Rivers there is a contact zone between P. bernhardi, Plecturocebus parecis and Plecturocebus cinerascens (Gusmão et al., Reference Gusmão, Messias, Carneiro, Schneider, de Alencar and Calouro2019) (Supplementary Fig. 1). We estimated that P. bernhardi potentially occurs in an area of 131,295 km2 (Fig. 1) of which 49.6% is legally protected.

Population estimate

We obtained 57 observations of P. bernhardi groups along the transects, with 161 individuals detected. The encounter rate was 0.2 groups/km (CV =  11.9). The best grouping of perpendicular distances to fit the detection curve was obtained with five intervals of 10 m each. The best detection function was uniform with one cosine adjustment term (Goodness-of-fit χ 2 = 0.67, df = 3, P = 0.88, AIC = 163.19; Fig. 2). Mean group size was 2.8 individuals/group (95% CI = 2.5–3.2, CV = 6.5). We estimated density to be 10.8 individuals/km2 (95% CI = 7.9–14.9, CV = 15.3), and 3.8 groups/km2 (95% CI = 2.9–5.1, CV = 13.8), and mean abundance to be 1,365,468 individuals (95% CI = 1,037,231–1,956,296, CV = 15.3).

Fig. 2 Distribution of perpendicular distances of observations of P. bernhardi from the centre of transects in the Madeira–Aripuanã interfluve. The trend line indicates the best detection function fitted to the distance classes.

Reassessment of conservation status

We estimated there was a loss of 36,903 km2 of forest cover within the species' potential range during 1995–2019, 28.1% of the total original range of the species (Fig. 3). Only 0.5% of this deforestation occurred within protected areas or Indigenous lands. In our predictive models the habitat loss of the species over the next 24 years would amount to 58,365 km2 under the governance scenario and 105,289 km2 under the business-as-usual scenario (Fig. 3), 44.5 and 80.2% of the species’ potential range, respectively. We estimated predicted deforestation within protected areas and Indigenous lands would be 3.2 and 16.7% under the governance and business-as-usual scenarios, respectively. Considering the lower bound of the CI of the population abundance (1,037,231 individuals), such levels of habitat loss under the business-as-usual scenario translate into a reduction of 831,859 P. bernhardi individuals from the population over this period. Under both scenarios considered, the projected population reduction of P. bernhardi qualifies the species for categorization under a threatened category on the IUCN Red List (44.5% habitat loss indicates a categorization as Vulnerable, and 80.2% a categorization as Critically Endangered; criteria A3c, IUCN, 2012).

Fig. 3 The accumulated (1995–2019) and predicted habitat loss according to different scenarios of deforestation within the geographical range of P. bernhardi.

Discussion

Although we estimated that P. bernhardi has a minimum population size of 1,365,468 individuals within a large geographical range, the current rate of deforestation in the region will probably result in considerable decline over the next 24 years. Protected areas and Indigenous lands have been effective at maintaining low rates of deforestation within their borders, and these land categories are the only large forest fragments in the southern distribution of this species. Under the business-as-usual scenario, however, deforestation rates would increase considerably. This region is a hotspot of deforestation (Carrero et al., Reference Carrero, Fearnside, do Valle and Alves2020) and the rate of deforestation predicted by 2050 in the Amazon rainforest (Soares-Filho et al., Reference Soares-Filho, Nepstad, Curran, Cerqueira, Garcia and Ramos2006; Nobre et al., Reference Nobre, Sampaio, Borma, Castilla-Rubio, Silva and Cardoso2016; Walker et al., Reference Walker, Simmons, Arima, Galvan-Miyoshi, Antunes, Waylen and Irigaray2019) could cause reductions in the populations of several primate species (Silva et al., Reference Silva, Endo, Silva, Santos, Sampaio and Röhe2018, Reference Silva, el Bizri, Gonçalves, Lemos, Costa-Araújo and Lima2020; Rabelo et al., Reference Rabelo, Gonçalves, Silva, Rocha, Canale, Bernardo and Boubli2020). Thus the large geographical ranges of some primates in southern Amazonia should not necessarily be used to categorize a species as Least Concern, especially when most of the distribution range of a species is within an area with an actual or potential high rate of deforestation.

There have been few studies of the ecology and behaviour Amazonian titi monkeys (e.g. Palacios et al., Reference Palacios, Rodríguez and Defler1997; Bicca-Marques & Heymann, Reference Biccca-Marques, Heymann, Veiga, Barnett, Ferrari and Norconk2013; Kulp & Heymann, Reference Kulp and Heymann2015; Martinez & Wallace, Reference Martinez and Wallace2016) and inferences regarding their habitat preferences are based mainly on data from species in the Atlantic Forest (but see Wagner et al., Reference Wagner, Castro and Stevenson2009; Chagas & Ferrari, Reference Chagas and Ferrari2010). Nonetheless, the ecological flexibility of many Amazonian titi monkeys and their preference for secondary forests (Wagner et al., Reference Wagner, Castro and Stevenson2009) have been used to support their categorization as Least Concern. However, deforestation within the species' range, whether ongoing or predicted, is usually from activities that result in clear-cutting, leaving no continuous forests or trees that could be inhabited and used by any primate species. A similar situation was also found for the recently described Plecturocebus grovesi (Boubli et al., Reference Boubli, Byrne, da Silva, Silva-Júnior, Araújo and Bertuol2019) c. 230 km to the east of our study area. The species was included in the list of the 25 most threatened primates, being categorized as Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List based on criteria A3c (i.e. population reduction projected, inferred or suspected to be met in the future; Boubli et al., Reference Boubli, Melo and Rylands2020). Questions regarding how Amazonian titi monkeys will cope with habitat fragmentation and what the genetic consequences of population reduction will be in these scenarios remain unanswered.

Based on our analysis and given the increasing rates of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon, we recommend that P. bernhardi should be categorized at least as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. In addition to habitat loss, several other anthropogenic activities could further affect P. bernhardi. For example, greater contact with people in remnant forest could increase the transmission of pathogens, including diseases with high fatality rates such as yellow fever, which have been reducing populations of non-human primate species in southern Brazil significantly, including titi monkeys (de Melo Mares et al., Reference de Mello Mares, Horta, Romano, Rodrigues, Mendonça and dos Santos2020; Berthet et al., Reference Berthet, Mesbahi, Duvot, Zuberbühler, Cäsar and Bicca-Marques2021; Fernandes et al., Reference Fernandes, Cunha, Guerra, Diaz-Delgado, Ressio and Cirqueira2021). In addition, fragmentation could provide new points of access to the forest for hunters and increase the harvest of wild animals (Renó et al., Reference Renó, Novo and Escada2016). The scenario described here for P. bernhardi therefore also raises concerns for the conservation of other species in highly impacted landscape of the southern Amazon. Examples include marmosets and titi monkeys that are currently categorized as Least Concern (e.g. M. chrysoleucos, Mico intermedius, P. cinerascens) or Data Deficient (Plecturocebus miltoni, Plecturocebus vierai), but that have large portions or even the entirety of their ranges lying in the Arc of Deforestation.

Although legally protected lands are essential for the conservation of Amazonian species, their integrity and effectiveness are at risk under the policies of the current government in Brazil (Pereira et al., Reference Pereira, Ferreira, Ribeiro, Carvalho and Pereira2019, Reference Pereira, Ribeiro, Freitas and Pereira2020; Diele-Viegas et al., Reference Diele-Viegas, Pereira and Rocha2020; Paiva et al., Reference Paiva, Ruivo, Silva, Maciel, Braga and Andrade2020; Pelicice & Castello, Reference Pelicice and Castello2021). Initiatives being promoted by the government and by politicians associated with agribusiness are weakening environmental regulations for controlling deforestation, resulting in a new wave of forest loss (Magnusson et al., Reference Magnusson, Grelle, Marques, Rocha, Dias and Fontana2018; Andrade et al., Reference Andrade, Ferrante and Fearnside2021; Mataveli et al., Reference Mataveli, Chaves, Brunsell and Aragão2021; Ruaro et al., Reference Ruaro, Ferrante and Fearnside2021). Such initiatives include the proposed bills PL490/2007 and PL191/2020, allowing mining and hydropower dams within Indigenous lands, and the so called land-grabbing bills PL2633/2020 and PL510/2021, which grant an amnesty to land-grabbers and invaders that irregularly occupy exploited and deforested federal lands (Aleixo & Junior, Reference Aleixo and Junior2022). Consequently, activities that increase deforestation in the southern Amazon such as land grabbing, illegal logging, mining and fire are being facilitated against a backdrop of impunity and a lack of governance (Azevedo-Ramos et al., Reference Azevedo-RAmos, Moutinho, Arruda, Stabile, Alencar, Castro and Ribeiro2020; Cardil et al., Reference Cardil, de-Miguel, Silva, Reich, Calkin and Brancalion2020; Pereira et al., Reference Pereira, Ribeiro, Freitas and Pereira2020; das Neves et al., Reference das Neves, Blanco, Duarte, das Neves, das Neves and dos Santos2021; Mataveli et al., Reference Mataveli, Chaves, Brunsell and Aragão2021). Even a small number of misguided and irresponsible policy decisions can significantly worsen an already difficult future scenario for Amazonian primates (Estrada et al., Reference Estrada, Garber, Mittermeier, Wich, Gouveia and Dobrovolski2018; Carvalho et al., Reference Carvalho, Graham, Rebelo, Bocksberger, Meyer, Wich and Kühl2019; Sales et al., Reference Sales, Ribeiro, Pires, Chapman and Loyola2019). The increasing economic and development pressures on this biome threaten not only titi monkeys but all species currently categorized as Least Concern in this region.

Acknowledgements

Data collection and analysis were supported by the Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (process numbers: 200502/2015-8, 302140/2020-4, 300365/2021-7, 301407/2021-5, 201475/2017-0), the Conservation Leadership Programme (02111212), the Primate Action Fund (#SMA-CCO-G0000000037), Primate Conservation, Inc. (PCI#1110), the International Primatological Society, and Idea Wild. We thank the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (Grant Agreement to Mamirauá Institute for Sustainable Development, #5344), Isaac Theobald and Aldeísa for logistical support and Catitu and José's family for support in the field.

Author contributions

Study design: FES, HREB; data collection: FES, LPL, ACG, ODdS, JCD, MIS; data analysis: FES, LGP, CLBF, HREB; interpretation of results and writing: all authors.

Conflicts of interest

None.

Ethical standards

This research abided by the Oryx guidelines on ethical standards. There were no human subjects, experimentation with animals or collection of specimens associated with this work. This research adhered to Brazilian law governing primate research and the principles of the American Society of Primatologists for the ethical treatment of primates.

Footnotes

*

Also at: Unit of Evolutionary Biology and Ecology, Département de Biologie des Organismes, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

†

Also at: Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, USA

‡

Also at: Mamirauá Institute for Sustainable Development Research, Research Group on Terrestrial Vertebrate Ecology, Tefé, Brazil, and Rede de Pesquisa em Diversidade, Conservação e Uso da Fauna na Amazônia, Manaus, Brazil

The article has been updated since original publication. A notice detailing the change has also been published.

Supplementary material for this article is available at doi.org/10.1017/S0030605322000655

References

Aleixo, L.S.P. & Junior, M.K.A. (2022) Deforestation and climate change in Brazil – legal and policy gaps. OECD Watch, The Netherlands. oecdwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2022/03/Bridging-Brazilian-governance-gaps-Deforestation-and-climate-change.pdf [accessed 28 June 2022].Google Scholar
Andrade, M., Ferrante, L. & Fearnside, P. (2021) Brazil's Highway BR-319 demonstrates a crucial lack of environmental governance in Amazonia. Environmental Conservation, 48, 161–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, J.M. & Clutton-Brock, T.H. (1992) River boundaries and species range size in Amazonian primates. The American Naturalist, 140, 531–537.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azevedo-RAmos, C., Moutinho, P., Arruda, V.L.D.S., Stabile, M.C., Alencar, A., Castro, I. & Ribeiro, J.P. (2020) Lawless land in no man's land: the undesignated public forests in the Brazilian Amazon. Land Use Policy, 99, 104863.Google Scholar
Berthet, M., Mesbahi, G., Duvot, G., Zuberbühler, K., Cäsar, C. & Bicca-Marques, J.C. (2021) Dramatic decline in a titi monkey population after the 2016–2018 sylvatic yellow fever outbreak in Brazil. American Journal of Primatology, 83, 23335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biccca-Marques, J.C. & Heymann, E.W. (2013) Ecology and behavior of titi monkeys (genus Callicebus). In Evolutionary Biology and Conservation of Titis, Sakis and Uacaris (eds Veiga, L.M., Barnett, A.A., Ferrari, S.F. & Norconk, M.A.), pp. 196–207. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boubli, J., Melo, F.R. & Rylands, A.B. (2020) Plecturocebus grovesi. In The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2020. dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-3.RLTS.T172272064A172272430.en.Google Scholar
Boubli, J.P., Byrne, H., da Silva, M.N., Silva-Júnior, J., Araújo, R.C., Bertuol, F. et al. (2019) On a new species of titi monkey (Primates: Plecturocebus Byrne et al., 2016), from Alta Floresta, southern Amazon, Brazil. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 132, 117–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boubli, J.P., Ribas, C., Alfaro, J.W.L., Alfaro, M.E., da Silva, M.N.F., Pinho, G.M. & Farias, I.P. (2015) Spatial and temporal patterns of diversification on the Amazon: a test of the riverine hypothesis for all diurnal primates of Rio Negro and Rio Branco in Brazil. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 82, 400–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P. & Lake, J.L. (1993) Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. Chapman and Hall, New York, USA.Google Scholar
Byrne, H., Rylands, A.B., Carneiro, J.C., Alfaro, J.W.L., Bertuol, F., da silva, M.N.F. et al. (2016) Phylogenetic relationships of the New World titi monkeys (Callicebus): first appraisal of taxonomy based on molecular evidence. Frontiers in Zoology, 13, 10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cardil, A., de-Miguel, S., Silva, C.A., Reich, P.B., Calkin, D., Brancalion, P.H. et al. (2020) Recent deforestation drove the spike in Amazonian fires. Environmental Research Letters, 15, 121003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrero, G.C., Fearnside, P.M., do Valle, D.R. & Alves, C.S. (2020) Deforestation trajectories on a development frontier in the Brazilian Amazon: 35 years of settlement colonization, policy and economic shifts, and land accumulation. Environmental Management, 66, 966–984.Google ScholarPubMed
Carvalho, J.S., Graham, B., Rebelo, H., Bocksberger, G., Meyer, C.F.J., Wich, S. & Kühl, H.S. (2019) A global risk assessment of primates under climate and land use/cover scenarios. Global Change Biology, 25, 3163–3178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chagas, R.R.D. & Ferrari, S.F. (2010) Habitat use by Callicebus coimbrai (Primates: Pitheciidae) and sympatric species in the fragmented landscape of the Atlantic Forest of southern Sergipe, Brazil. Zoologia, 27, 853–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
das Neves, P.B.T., Blanco, C.J.C., Duarte, A.A.A.M., das Neves, F.B.S., das Neves, I.B.S. & dos Santos, M.H.D.P. (2021) Amazon Rainforest deforestation influenced by clandestine and regular roadway network. Land Use Policy, 108, 105510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de la Torre, J.A., González-Maya, J.F., Zarza, H., Ceballos, G. & Medellín, R.A. (2018) The jaguar's spots are darker than they appear: assessing the global conservation status of the jaguar Panthera onca. Oryx, 52, 300–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Mello Mares, M.A.M., Horta, M.A., Romano, A., Rodrigues, C.D., Mendonça, M.C., dos Santos, C.C. et al. (2020) Yellow fever epizootics in non-human primates, southeast and northeast Brazil (2017 and 2018). Parasites & Vectors, 13, 90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diele-Viegas, L.M., Pereira, E.J.D.A.L. & Rocha, C.F.D. (2020) The new Brazilian gold rush: is Amazonia at risk? Forest Policy and Economics, 119, 102270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erinjery, J.J., Kumar, S., Kumara, H.N., Mohan, K., Dhananjaya, T., Sundararaj, P. et al. (2017) Losing its ground: a case study of fast declining populations of a ‘Least-Concern’ species, the bonnet macaque (Macaca radiata). PLOS ONE, 12, e0182140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estrada, A., Garber, P.A., Rylands, A.B., Roos, C., Fernandez-Duque, E., Di Fiore, A. et al. (2017) Impending extinction crisis of the world's primates: why primates matter. Science Advances, 3, e1600946.Google ScholarPubMed
Estrada, A., Garber, P.A., Mittermeier, R.A., Wich, S., Gouveia, S., Dobrovolski, R. et al. (2018) Primates in peril: the significance of Brazil, Madagascar, Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo for global primate conservation. PeerJ, 6, e4869.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fernandes, N.C.D.A., Cunha, M.S., Guerra, J.M., Diaz-Delgado, J., Ressio, R.A., Cirqueira, C.S. et al. (2021) Yellow fever as cause of death of titi monkeys (Callicebus spp.). Veterinary Pathology, 54, 730–735.Google Scholar
Gusmão, A.C., Messias, M.R., Carneiro, J.C., Schneider, H., de Alencar, T.B., Calouro, A. et al. (2019) A new species of titi monkey, Plecturocebus Byrne et al. 2016 (Primates, Pitheciidae), from southwestern Amazonia, Brazil. Primate Conservation, 33, 1–15.Google Scholar
Hayakawa, E.H. & Rossetti, D.F. (2015) Late Quaternary dynamics in the Madeira river basin, southern Amazonia (Brazil), as revealed by paleomorphological analysis. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 87, 29–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IUCN (2012) IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Version 3.1, 2nd edition. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
Kulp, J. & Heymann, E.W. (2015) Ranging, activity budget, and diet composition of red titi monkeys (Callicebus cupreus) in primary forest and forest edge. Primates, 56, 273–278.Google ScholarPubMed
Mace, G.M., Collar, N.J., Gaston, K.J., Hilton-Taylor, C., Akçakaya, H.R., Leader-Williams, N. et al. (2008) Quantification of extinction risk: IUCN's system for classifying threatened species. Conservation Biology, 22, 1424–1442.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Magnusson, W.E., Grelle, C.E.V., Marques, M.C.M., Rocha, C.F.D., Dias, B., Fontana, C.S. et al. (2018) Effects of Brazil's political crisis on the science needed for biodiversity conservation. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 6, 163.Google Scholar
Malhi, Y., Roberts, J.T., Betts, R.A., Killeen, T.J., Wenhong, L. & Nobre, C.A. (2008) Climate change, deforestation, and the fate of the Amazon. Science, 319, 169–172.Google ScholarPubMed
MapBiomas, (2020) MapBiomas Collection 5 of Brazilian Land Cover & Use Map Series. mapbiomas.org/en [accessed 3 May 2021].Google Scholar
Martinez, J. & Wallace, R.B. (2016) Ecological and behavioural factors influencing territorial call rates for the Bolivian titi monkeys, Plecturocebus modestus and Plecturocebus olallae. Folia Primatologica, 87, 279–290.Google ScholarPubMed
Martinez, J. & Wallace, R.B. (2021) An update on the distribution and abundance of the endemic and threatened Olalla's titi monkey (Plecturocebus olallae). Primate Conservation, 35, 12–19.Google Scholar
Mataveli, G.A., Chaves, M.E., Brunsell, N.A. & Aragão, L.E. (2021) The emergence of a new deforestation hotspot in Amazonia. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, 19, 33–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, D.S. (2010) Of least concern? Systematics of a cryptic species complex: Limnonectes kuhlii (Amphibia: Anura: Dicroglossidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 56, 991–1000.Google Scholar
Michalski, F. & Peres, C.A. (2005) Anthropogenic determinants of primate and carnivore local extinctions in a fragmented forest landscape of southern Amazonia. Biological Conservation, 124, 383–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miranda, F., Fallabrino, A., Arteaga, M., Tirira, D.G., Meritt, D.A. & Superina, M. (2014) Tamandua tetradactyla. In The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2014. dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2014-1.RLTS.T21350A47442916.en.Google Scholar
Monção, G.R., Selhorst, V. & Soares-Filho, J.A. (2008) Expansão da distribuição geográfica de Callicebus bernhardi a oeste do rio Ji-Paraná, estado de Rondônia, Brasil. Neotropical Primates, 15, 67–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nobre, C.A., Sampaio, G., Borma, L.S., Castilla-Rubio, J.C., Silva, J.S. & Cardoso, M. (2016) Land-use and climate change risks in the Amazon and the need of a novel sustainable development paradigm. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113, 10759–10768.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osipova, L. & Sangermano, F. (2016) Surrogate species protection in Bolívia under climate and land cover change scenarios. Journal for Nature Conservation, 34, 107–117.Google Scholar
Paiva, P.F.P.R., Ruivo, M.L.P., Silva, O.M. Jr, Maciel, M.N.M., Braga, T.G.M., Andrade, M.M.N. et al. (2020) Deforestation in protect areas in the Amazon: a threat to biodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation, 29, 19–38.Google Scholar
Palacios, E., Rodríguez, A. & Defler, T.R. (1997) Diet of a group of Callicebus torquatus lugens (Humboldt, 1812) during the annual resource bottleneck in Amazonian, Colombia. International Journal of Primatology, 18, 503–522.Google Scholar
Pelicice, F.M. & Castello, L. (2021) A political tsunami hits Amazon conservation. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 31, 1221–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, E.J.A.L., Ferreira, P.J.S., Ribeiro, L.C.S., Carvalho, T.S. & Pereira, H.B.B. (2019) Policy in Brazil (2016–2019) threaten conservation of the Amazon Rainforest. Environmental Science & Policy, 100, 8–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, E.J.A.L., Ribeiro, L.C.S., Freitas, L.F.S. & Pereira, H.B.B. (2020) Brazilian policy and agribusiness damage the Amazon Rainforest. Land Use Policy, 92, 104491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Printes, R.C., Buss, G., Azevedo, R.B., Ravetta, A.L. & Silva, G.N. (2018) Update on the geographic distributions of two titi monkeys, Plecturocebus hoffmannsi (Thomas, 1908) and P. baptista (Lönnberg, 1939), in two protected areas in the Brazilian Amazon. Primate Conservation, 32, 81–88.Google Scholar
QGIS Development Team (2021) QGIS Geographical Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. qgis.osgeo.org [accessed 15 May 2022].Google Scholar
Quintino, E.P. & Bicca-Marques, J.C. (2013) Occurrence of Callicebus bernhardi in Rolim de Moura, Rondônia, Brazil. Neotropical Primates, 20, 62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rabelo, R., Gonçalves, J., Silva, F., Rocha, D., Canale, G., Bernardo, C. & Boubli, J. (2020) Predicted distribution and habitat loss for the Endangered black-faced black spider monkey Ateles chamek in the Amazon. Oryx, 54, 699–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renó, V., Novo, E. & Escada, M. (2016) Forest fragmentation in the lower Amazon floodplain: implications for biodiversity and ecosystem service provision to riverine populations. Remote Sensing, 8, 886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rocha, A., Barnett, A.P.A. & Spironello, W.R. (2019) Extension of the geographic distribution of Plecturocebus baptista (Pitheciidae, Primates) and a possible hybrid zone with Plecturocebus hoffmannsi: evolutionary and conservation implications. Acta Amazonica, 49, 330–333.Google Scholar
Röhe, F. & Boubli, J. (2018) Plecturocebus bernhardi. In The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018. dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2018-2.RLTS.T41561A17973161.en.Google Scholar
Röhe, F. & Mittermeier, R.A. (2021) Mico chrysoleucos (amended version of 2018 assessment). In The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2021. dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2021-1.RLTS.T39910A192399226.en.Google Scholar
Ruaro, R., Ferrante, L. & Fearnside, P.M. (2021) Brazil's doomed environmental licensing. Science, 372, 1049–1050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sales, L.P., Ribeiro, B.R., Pires, M.M., Chapman, C.A. & Loyola, R. (2019) Recalculating route: dispersal constraints will drive the redistribution of Amazon primates in the Anthropocene. Ecography, 42, 1789–1801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sengupta, A. & Radhakrishna, S. (2013) Of concern yet? Distribution and conservation status of the bonnet macaque (Macaca radiata) in Goa, India. Primate Conservation, 27, 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, F.E., el Bizri, H.R., Gonçalves, J.R., Lemos, L.P., Costa-Araújo, R., Lima, I.J. et al. (2020) The Roosevelt–Rondon expedition marmoset Mico marcai: unveiling the conservation status of a data deficient species. Oryx, 54, 539–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, F.E., Endo, W., Silva, J.S. Jr, Santos, M.S. Jr, Sampaio, R. & Röhe, F. (2018) New insights into the distribution and conservation status of the golden-white tassel-ear marmoset Mico chrysoleucos (Primates, Callitrichidae). Primates, 59, 347–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva-Diogo, O., Costa, T.M., Almeida, E.M. & Fermiano, E.C. (2018) Atualização do conhecimento e padrões de pelagem distintos em grupos de zogue-zogue dentro da distribuição geográfica de Plecturocebus bernhardi van Roosmalen et al. (2002). Neotropical Primates, 24, 29–33.Google Scholar
Soares-Filho, B.S., Nepstad, D.C., Curran, L.M., Cerqueira, G.C., Garcia, R.A., Ramos, C.A. et al. (2006) Modelling conservation in the Amazon basin. Nature, 440, 520–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Superina, M. & Abba, A.M. (2020) Conservation perspectives for a highly disparate lineage of mammals: the Xenarthra. Mastozoologia Neotropical, 27, 48–67.Google Scholar
Thomas, L., Buckland, S.T., Rextad, E.A., Laake, J.L., Strindberg, S., Hedley, S.L. et al. (2010) Distance software: design and analysis of distance sampling surveys for estimating population size. Journal of Applied Ecology, 47, 5–14.Google ScholarPubMed
van Roosmalen, M.G.M., van Roosmalen, T. & Mittermeier, R.A. (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. Neotropical Primates, 10(Suppl.), 1–52.Google Scholar
Vermeer, J., Tello-Alvarado, J.C., Moreno-Moreno, S. & Guerra-Vásquez, F. (2011) Extension of the geographical range of white-browed titi monkeys (Callicebus discolor) and evidence for sympatry with San Martin titi monkeys (Callicebus oenanthe). International Journal of Primatology, 32, 924–930.Google Scholar
Wagner, M., Castro, F. & Stevenson, P.R. (2009) Habitat characterization and population status of the dusky titi (Callicebus ornatus) in fragmented forests, Meta, Colombia. Neotropical Primates, 16, 18–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, R.T., Simmons, C., Arima, E., Galvan-Miyoshi, Y., Antunes, A., Waylen, M. & Irigaray, M. (2019) Avoiding Amazonian catastrophes: prospects for conservation in the 21st century. One Earth, 1, 202–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Plate 1 Prince Bernhard's titi monkey Plecturocebus bernhardi. Photo: Marcelo Santana.

Figure 1

Fig. 1 The areas surveyed in this study (A-G) and the records of P. bernhardi. Numbers indicate the locality records of P. bernhardi recorded in this study and obtained from the literature (Supplementary Table 1). ILs, Indigenous lands; PAs, protected areas.

Figure 2

Table 1 The seven sites surveyed in the Madeira–Aripuanã interfluve and Ji-Paraná River for Prince Bernhard's titi monkey Plecturocebus bernhardi (Fig. 1).

Figure 3

Fig. 2 Distribution of perpendicular distances of observations of P. bernhardi from the centre of transects in the Madeira–Aripuanã interfluve. The trend line indicates the best detection function fitted to the distance classes.

Figure 4

Fig. 3 The accumulated (1995–2019) and predicted habitat loss according to different scenarios of deforestation within the geographical range of P. bernhardi.

Supplementary material: PDF

Silva et al. supplementary material

Silva et al. supplementary material

Download Silva et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 400.4 KB