ArticleAmerican journal of primatology2026
The Vocal Repertoire of Gray-Cheeked Mangabeys (Lophocebus albigena) in the Bugoma Forest Reserve, Uganda.
Article in American journal of primatology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Vocal communication is central for regulating social interactions among primates, particularly in dense forest environments with limited visibility. The acoustic structure of vocalizations is often shaped by a species' socio-ecology. However, numerous species remain poorly documented, including the gray-cheeked mangabey (Lophocebus albigena), an arboreal primate endemic to the forests of Central and East Africa. We combined acoustic measurements with behavioral observations to provide a first quantitative and contextual description of the gray-cheeked mangabey vocal repertoire in the Bugoma Central Forest Reserve (Uganda). Using a discriminant function analysis, we report four acoustically distinct call types: chuckles, grunts, screams, and whoop-gobbles, which were also observed in different social contexts, suggesting a discrete, yet small, vocal repertoire. The two most frequently observed call types were chuckles and grunts. Chuckles were mainly produced during resting phases, and in vocal exchanges between distant individuals, suggesting they function to maintain group contact at medium or longer ranges. Grunts, in contrast, were associated with feeding and grooming, and often produced in short-distance choruses, supporting the hypothesis that they facilitate group cohesion on a smaller spatial scale. The two other call types were more rarely observed: screams were associated with agonistic interactions, while whoop-gobbles were produced more spontaneously, with no clear behavioral correlate that we could record, but may serve functions related to long-distance communication. These findings provide new insights into a little-studied species and pave the way for phylogenetic and functional comparisons with other cercopithecid primates. Nonetheless, many questions remain open and would benefit from further investigation.
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.