ArticlePrimates; journal of primatology2021
Uses of nonhuman primates by humans in northeastern Brazil.
Article in Primates; journal of primatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans have used non-human primates (hereafter referred to as primates) as food source, medicine, parts of rituals, pets, and models for various studies worldwide. Here we investigated the extent of the use of primates by humans in three areas in northeastern Brazil, the country's most impoverished region. We carried out our study in three biomes (Caatinga, Cerrado, and Atlantic Forest). The results showed that humans exploited all five primate species occurring in the study sites: Callithrix jacchus, Sapajus flavius, Sapajus libidinosus, Alouatta belzebul, and Alouatta ululata. They used the primates as a food source, as pets and medicines, and for leisure. Despite socioeconomic differences in the study areas, we found similarities in the use of primates. Larger primates were targeted for meat, whereas the small common marmosets were targeted as pets. We found conflicting interactions between humans and bearded capuchins due to crop raiding, but no such conflict was found between humans and blonde capuchins, reflecting the differences in crop type, pattern, and tradition in the sites. A. ululata was used as medicine. We suggest that environmental education actions in the study areas should focus on (i) raising awareness among local people of the ecological importance of primates, (ii) providing alternative activities to hunting whenever possible, and (iii) minimising conflicts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34050850What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.