ArticlePrimates; journal of primatology2026
Primate carcass ecology in the Urema Rift, Mozambique.
Article in Primates; journal of primatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Natural history is more relevant than ever for primate ecology and conservation.Primates; journal of primatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Primates constitute an integral part of many African ecosystems. In some areas, primate species can be locally very abundant, while in others they are rare or absent. Our central question is: does the abundance of primate bones (or carcasses) reflect the abundance of local living populations? Past bone surveys in Amboseli National Park, Kenya, and Virunga National Park, Democratic Republic of Congo, revealed a positive correlation between carcass abundance and living mammal communities, with a notable exception: a low abundance or absence of primate carcasses when compared to other medium-sized and large mammals. Recent research conducted at Gorongosa National Park, Mozambique, revealed a similar discrepancy between the abundance of primate carcasses and mammalian live census data. This study aims to understand this mismatch between live and dead by examining the influence of ecological factors on primate carcass occurrence and bone distribution in the modern rift ecosystem of Gorongosa National Park. To address these issues, we investigated whether (1) landscape type, proximity to roads, and water sources (pans, rivers, and lakes) predict primate carcass occurrence relative to other mammal taxa, and (2) the accumulation of primate bones significantly differs from that of other mammals in annually flooding and non-annually flooding landscapes (broadly speaking, in the floodplain vs. higher areas). We analysed 26 bones from 18 chacma baboon individuals (Papio ursinus) and 255 bones from 20 other mammal species. Generalised Linear Model (GLM) outputs suggest that permanent water sources such as rivers and lakes are key drivers of primate bone accumulation (p < 0.05). A Fisher's Exact Test indicates that primate bones are deposited more frequently in Rift Valley Riverine & Floodplain landscapes (p < 0.05). Given that baboons regularly cross rivers in Gorongosa, these findings also suggest that crocodile predation may play an important role in determining where baboon carcasses ultimately accumulate, potentially contributing to the observed mismatch between living and dead communities. These findings have important implications for our understanding of primate bone accumulations in the African fossil record, where some palaeontological sites contain abundant primate fossils whereas others preserve few or none.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.