Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31675103›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of physical anthropology2020

Modeling variation in the growth of wild and captive juvenile vervet monkeys in relation to diet and resource availability.

Jonathan D Jarrett, Tyler Bonnell, Matthew J Jorgensen, Christopher A Schmitt, Christopher Young, Marcus Dostie, Louise Barrett, Stephanus Peter Henzi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of physical anthropology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Influence of Diet on Metabolism and Health Across the Lifespan in Nonhuman Primates.Current opinion in endocrine and metabolic research · 2022
    Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Jonathan D JarrettDepartment of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
Tyler BonnellDepartment of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
Matthew J JorgensenDepartment of Pathology, Section on Comparative Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Christopher A SchmittDepartment of Anthropology and Biology, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0003-2143-9226
Christopher YoungDepartment of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
Marcus DostieDepartment of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
Louise BarrettDepartment of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.
Stephanus Peter HenziDepartment of Psychology, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6175-1674

Funding

Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR001420 · NCATS · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI ARD, JAMY D, FOLEY, KRISTIE L · 2015 to 2023
$32.3M
Vervet Research Colony as a Biomedical ResourceP40OD010965 · OD · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Matthew Jorgensen · 2012 to 2026
$14.6M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001420NIH HHS P40 OD010965
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare longitudinal weight gain in captive and wild juvenile vervet monkeys and conduct an empirical assessment of different mechanistic growth models.

methodsWeights were collected from two groups of captive monkeys and two consecutive cohorts of wild monkeys until the end of the juvenile period (~800 days). The captive groups were each fed different diets, while the wild groups experienced different ecological conditions. Three different growth curve models were compared.

resultsBy 800 days, the wild juveniles were lighter, with a slower maximum growth rate, and reached asymptote earlier than their captive counterparts. There were overall differences in weight and growth rate across the two wild cohorts. This corresponded to differences in resource availability. There was considerable overlap in growth rate and predicted adult weight of male and females in the first, but not the second, wild cohort. Maternal parity was not influential. While the von Bertalanffy curve provided the best fit to the data sets modeled together, the Logistic curve best described growth in the wild cohorts when considered separately.

conclusionsThe growth curves of the two captive cohorts are likely to lie near the maximum attainable by juvenile vervets. It may be helpful to include deviations from these rates when assessing the performance of wild vervet monkeys. The comparison of wild and captive juveniles confirmed the value of comparing different growth curve models, and an appreciation that the best models may well differ for different populations. Choice of mechanistic growth model can, therefore, be empirically justified, rather than theoretically predetermined.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, WildAnimals, ZooChlorocebus aethiopsDietFemaleMaleModels, BiologicalChlorocebus pygerythrusmechanistic model selectionsex differencesweight gain

Identifiers

PMID31675103
PMCPMC7449506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.