ChrisHodgesUK via Wikimedia Commons
South Africaâs samango monkeys live on what ecologists call a âvertical axis of fear.â They live and eat in trees, and if they climb too high looking for food, theyâre liable to get attacked and eaten by an eagle. If they venture too low, itâs leopards and desert lynxes they have to worry about. With every trip for food and every climb up and down the tree, a monkey needs to assess risk and rewardâthe benefits of eating versus the risk of being eaten. But a new study suggests that itâs not just food and predators that the monkeys take into account when deciding where to eat. They also think about us.Â
When scientists study animal behavior, they rely on the idea that theyâll become a neutral presence by not being too intrusive and habituating the animals to the fact that there are humans gawking at them. Once an animal is used to them, they hope, it will act naturally when theyâre around. But they also know that thatâs not always the case. In Tanzania, colobus monkeys fled whenever researchers studying their chimpanzee neighbors came around. The chimps eventually figured out that they could take advantage of that, and let the humans flush out their prey like hunting dogs for easy capture.
Even human infrastructure is enough to change the way that animals act. When bears recolonized Grand Teton National Park, moose shifted their birthing sites closer to the parkâs paved roads, using them as a safe zone where the traffic-averse predators would leave them alone.Â
A team of researchers from South Africa, the UK, and the Netherlands have now found that the samango monkeys likewise feel safer when humans are around and adjust their behavior accordingly. The scientists did this by looking at whatâs called a âgiving-up densityâ (GUD), the amount of food that a foraging animal will abandon in a given spot. Animals will probably feed more where and when they feel safe, so the GUD should correspond to the perceived riskiness of a feeding site and be lower where itâs safe and higher where thereâs a threat.
The researchers hung plastic tubs full of peanuts at different heights in the trees at a site in South Africaâs Soutpansberg Mountains. The lowest tubs were around four inches off the ground and the highest were 24 feet up, just below the forest canopy. Then they looked at how much of this food two groups of monkeys ate and how much they left behind on days when the scientists followed them versus days when there were no humans around, to get an idea of how their presence impacted the monkeysâ risk assessment and behavior.
The team found that GUDs differed greatly between âfollow daysâ and non-follow days. Both groups of monkeys ate more from the higher bins when the researchers werenât around, a sign that ground-level food is a riskier option and big cats pose more of a threat than big birds. On days that the team hung around the feeding stations, though, the monkeys ate more from all the bins, with the biggest difference in the ones closest to the ground. With humans around, the monkeys seemed to feel safer everywhere up and down the trees, but especially near the forest floor. That suggests, the team writes, that they see us as âshieldsâ against predators, particularly terrestrial ones. That makes sense because humans are usually on the ground and not up in the air, but also because leopards in the Soutpansberg area are often targets for poachers and ranchers who see them as a threat to livestock, and are generally wary of humans there.
That the monkeys can assess how one animalâs presence impacts another, and use scientists and other people traipsing through the forest as human shields, shows how observant and clever they can be. It also made the researchers wonder just how neutral a presence humans are and how naturally animals act when theyâre around. Both of the monkey groups they looked at have been regularly studied by scientists for the last few years and, in theory, should be pretty used to humans being around. But even these habituated animals responded to human presence by changing their behavior and feeding habits, implying that some of the observations of animal behavior that scientists have made could be skewed or complicated simply because there was someone there to make them.
Loading recommendations... Please wait while we load personalized content recommendations