ArticleAmerican journal of biological anthropology2026
Of Monsters and Monkeys: Queering the Study of Genetic Chimerism in Primates.
Article in American journal of biological anthropology, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific research is a political enterprise, and is therefore susceptible to cultural biases. With its central role in understanding humans as a species, primatology is particularly vulnerable to this dynamic, requiring researchers to carefully assess both the influences shaping their work and the implications of their results. Here, I engage in this practice by critically examining the study of chimerism in callitrichid primates, a prominent model taxon in studies of human health and evolution. Chimerism, which refers to cells derived from two or more zygotic lineages within a single organism, is a defining feature of callitrichid biology. Chimerism also challenges the boundaries by which many biological categories are defined. Using the lens of queer monster theory, I investigate the relationship between the study of callitrichid chimerism and the conceptualization of callitrichid and human bodies, with particular attention to the role of "queer" sex and reproduction. I first discuss the origins of chimerism within biological discourse, showing how the biological chimera inherited "unnatural" connotations that continue to shape scientific research. I then examine how similar monster-making practices surface in studies of callitrichids, arguing that patterns of omission and claims of exceptionalism serve to manage chimerism as a categorical threat. Finally, I explore the promises that callitrichid chimeras present as monstrous informants. I show that callitrichid chimeras can be used not only to expose the cultural boundary-work structuring sex and reproduction, but to invite research practices that treat categorical deviation not as abnormal, but as evidence that these categories must be changed.
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.