Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27517268›Full record

ArticlePrimates; journal of primatology2017

Scales drive detection, attention, and memory of snakes in wild vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus pygerythrus).

Lynne A Isbell, Stephanie F Etting

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Primates; journal of primatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Why Are Some Snakes More Terrifying and What Is Behind the Fear?Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Primates 2020 Most-Cited Paper Award.Primates; journal of primatology · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lynne A IsbellDepartment of Anthropology, University of California, One Shields Ave., Davis, CA, 95616, USA. laisbell@ucdavis.edu.
Stephanie F EttingDepartment of Anthropology, University of California, One Shields Ave., Davis, CA, 95616, USA.
Kenya Wildlife Service · KEUniversity of California, Davis · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predatory snakes are argued to have been largely responsible for the origin of primates via selection favoring expansion of the primate visual system, and even today snakes can be deadly to primates. Neurobiological research is now beginning to reveal the mechanisms underlying the ability of primates (including humans) to detect snakes more rapidly than other stimuli. However, the visual cues allowing rapid detection of snakes, and the cognitive and ecological conditions contributing to faster detection, are unclear. Since snakes are often partially obscured by vegetation, the more salient cues are predicted to occur in small units. Here we tested for the salience of snake scales as the smallest of potential visual cues by presenting four groups of wild vervet monkeys (Chlorocebus pytherythrus) with a gopher snake (Pituophis catenifer) skin occluded except for no more than 2.7 cm, in natural form and flat, the latter to control for even small curvilinear cues from their unusual body shape. Each of these treatments was preceded by a treatment without the snakeskin, the first to provide a baseline, and the second, to test for vigilance and memory recall after exposure to the snakeskin. We found that (1) vervets needed only a small portion of snakeskin for detection, (2) snake scales alone were sufficient for detection, (3) latency to detect the snakeskin was longer with more extensive and complex ground cover, and (4) vervets that were exposed to the snakeskin remembered where they last saw "snakes", as indicated by increased wariness near the occluding landmarks in the absence of the snakeskin and more rapid detection of the next presented snakeskin. Unexpectedly, adult males did not detect the snakeskin as well as adult females and juveniles. These findings extend our knowledge of the complex ecological and evolutionary relationships between snakes and primates.

Indexed as

AttentionCuesMemorySnakesAnimalsChlorocebus aethiopsFemaleKenyaMaleAge/sex differencesMemoryPrimatesRapid detectionSnake detection theoryVigilanceVisual attentionVisual cues

Identifiers

PMID27517268
OpenAlexW2509390083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.