|Scientific Name:||Brachyteles arachnoides|
|Species Authority:||(É. Geoffroy, 1806)|
|Taxonomic Notes:||Vieira (1944) recognized two subspecies of Brachyteles. Recent evidence provided by Lemos de Sá et al. (1990), Fonseca et al. (1991) and Lemos de Sá and Glander (1993) indicated that Vieira’s original (1944) standing was valid, but that differentiation is even more extreme and justifies the classification of the two forms as separate species (see also Coimbra-Filho et al. 1993). Groves (2001, 2005) lists the two muriquis as separate species.|
|Red List Category & Criteria:||Endangered C1 ver 3.1|
|Assessor(s):||Mendes, S.L., de Oliveira, M.M., Mittermeier, R.A. & Rylands, A.B.|
|Reviewer(s):||Mittermeier, R.A., Rylands, A.B. (Primate Red List Authority) & Hoffmann, M. (Global Mammal Assessment Team)|
This species is listed as Endangered due to a small population as well as historic and ongoing decline due primarily to hunting pressure. There are less than 1,500 individuals left in the wild, and it is entirely feasible that the population could undergo a 20% decline over the course of the coming two generations (estimated at 40 years). Historic loss of habitat has fragmented populations across part of the range. It is also entirely possible that this species has suffered a decline exceeding 80% over the course of the past 60 years, thereby potentially qualifying for listing under criterion A.
|Range Description:||According to Aguirre (1971), Brachyteles arachnoides was to be found in climax montane forests at altitudes of 600 to 1,800 m above sea level, in well-preserved remnants of seasonal and evergreen forests in the states of São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and Paraná. It occurs north as far as the southern slopes of the Serra da Mantiqueira, running approximately east-west in southern Minas Gerais, northern São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro (Lemos de Sá and Glander 1993). Its stronghold today is in the montane forests of the Serra de Paranapiacaba (Talebi and Soares 2005). Based on a reference of Krieg, cited by Hill (1962, pp.252–356), Aguirre (1971) considered the southern limit of the range of the species to be about 25ºS, in the region of the Rio Ribeira in Paraná. Martuscelli et al. (1994) informed of two localities where they found muriquis in Paraná. One was in the municipality of Jaguariaíva, the other in the Guaraqueçaba Environmental Protection Area, near to 25ºS, corroborating the southern limit of Aguirre (1971). The first locality is in the municipality of Sengés, on the banks of the Rio Jaguaricatu, and the second is in the south of the state of São Paulo (Koehler et al. 2005).
Koehler et al. (2005) provide details of its known range on northern Paraná. These authors carried out surveys for B. arachnoides along the rios Açungui, Ribeira, Turvo, Santana and Ponta Grossa and, farther east, on the rios Grande and São Sebastião (all affluents of the Rio Ribeira marking the state limits of Paraná with São Paulo). Throughout the region, the only remnant forest of any considerable size is that of the Lauráceas State Park of 23,000 ha, in a montane region of the municipalities of Adrianópolis and Tunas do Paraná. It is quite probable that muriquis will be found there.
Native:Brazil (Paraná, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo)
|Range Map:||Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.|
|Population:||The estimated total population is 1,300 individuals (Melo and Dias 2005). The largest single population of muriquis is evidently that in the Carlos Botelho State Park.|
|Habitat and Ecology:||
Inhabits submontane and montane evergreen tropical forest of the Atlantic coast of Brazil.
Studies of feeding ecology have been made in the Carlos Botelho State Park (Moraes 1992a,b; Talebi et al. 2005), the Fazenda Barreiro Rico by Milton (1984) and Martins (2003a,b, 2005b, 2006) and the Intervales State Park (Petroni 1993, 2000).
Adult male weight 10.2 kg (n=1) (Lemos de Sá and Glander 1993)
Adult female weight 8.5 kg (n=1) (Lemos de Sá and Glander 1993)
The geographical distribution and status of the southern muriqui populations in São Paulo are still poorly known. Hunting (Lane 1990) and habitat loss and fragmentation are the main threats. The southern muriqui has been extirpated throughout the lowland (plateau) forests of São Paulo, Paraná and Rio de Janeiro, except at one site: the Fazenda Barreiro Rico in Sao Paulo (Milton and de Lucca 1984; Martins 2005b). Today, its populations can only otherwise be found in remote montane forests of the Serra do Mar in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo. Although occurring in relatively large expanses of protected forest, it seems they occur naturally at lower densities in these areas than in smaller, fragmented forests. All wild muriqui populations are declining.
The following are the current principal threats to the southern muriqui as outlined by Talebi and Soares (2005):
Forest loss. Less than 7% of the muriqui’s forests remain, and much of what does is highly fragmented. Deforestation has occurred as a result of logging, intensive land-use for subsistence and commercial farming (for example, coffee), timber plantations (eucalyptus and pine) and cattle ranching, through urban expansion, and highway construction and general infrastructure development, both regional and national, such as dams and the leisure industry. Despite its protected status, the Paranapiacaba Ecological Continuum will always be under threat from developmental pressures such as these.
Hunting for sport. Historically, and even today in some areas, the muriqui is hunted for sport, a cultural trait that has remained from the earliest days of the colonization of São Paulo State by Europeans.
Mining in the buffer zones of protected areas. This refers particularly to bauxite, sand, clay, and granite. These activities result in deforestation, erosion, flooding, and the silting and pollution of rivers and streams.
Illegal palm-harvesting in large areas of forest. The palm tree, Euterpe edulis, is endemic to the Atlantic Forest, and an economically important forest product. Palm tree harvesters (palmiteiros) camp in the forest and transport and process the palm hearts in glass jars, while still in the forest. Thousands of palm trees can be felled in just a few days. Populations of E. edulis are declining everywhere in areas where they used to be the dominant understorey tree. Palmiteiros hunt game, including muriquis, during their sojourns in the forest.
Most of these threats are repeated by Garcia (2005), who summarizes threats to this species in Rio de Janeiro as follows:
Although occurring in a number of protected areas, muriquis are under pressure from hunting, habitat loss and degradation, and disturbance from human activities everywhere they occur. In the Serra dos Órgãos National Park, for example, both adventure tourism (perhaps restricting the area that the muriquis will use) and hunting were evidently serious enough to be prejudicial to the small number of muriquis surviving there (Cunha 2005). There is hunting throughout the park. In the APA Cairuçú, the Paraíso Ecological Station, and in the region of Macaé de Cima hunting is also the key factor (Silva 1987; Martuscelli et al. 1994). Garcia (2005) found that both hunting and deforestation by squatters are threats in the Desengano State Park. The Itatiaia National Park would seem to be comparatively free of hunting, and habitat loss is probably the key issue with the constant presence of people living in the park, of tourists, the threat of fires, and the illegal exploitation of plants such as palms for palm hearts (Rocha et al. 2003).
This species is recorded from the following protected areas:
Itatiaia National Park, Rio de Janeiro (28,267 ha) (Câmara 1995; Marroig and Sant`Anna 2001)
Serra dos Órgãos National Park, Rio de Janeiro (11,800 ha) (Garcia and Andrade Filho 2002; Cunha 2003, 2004)
Desengano State Park, Rio de Janeiro (22,400 ha) (Garcia 2005)
Carlos Botelho State Park, São Paulo (37,432 ha) (Pacaganella 1991; Mittermeier et al. 1987; Talebi and Soares 2005)
Intervales State Park, São Paulo (45,000 ha) (Petroni 2000)
Alto Ribeira State Park (55,000 ha) (UNESCO 1999)
Lauráceas State Park, Paraná (23,000 ha) (possibly: Koehler et al. 2005)
Xitué Ecological Station (3,095 ha) (Gonzalez-Solis et al. 2001)
Paraiso Ecological Station, Rio de Janeiro (5,000 ha) (Garcia 2005)
Cairuçú Environmetal Protection Area (APA), Rio de Janeiro (33,800 ha) (Vaz 1998; Garcia 2005)
Guaraqueçaba Environmental Protection Area, Paraná (283,014 ha) (Martuscelli et al. 1994; Koehler et al. 2005
A long-term research site was set up in the Carlos Botelho State Park in 1986 and the NGO Associação Pró-Muriqui was set up in 2000 to ensure continued research activities in the park and elsewhere in São Paulo (Talebi and Soares 2005)
A Population and Habitat Viability Analysis (PHVA) was held for both species of Brachyteles in 1998 (Rylands et al. 1998), which sparked a series of surveys in Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro, Espírito Santo and Bahia. In 2002, the Brazilian Institute for the Environment (IBAMA) set up the Committee for the Conservation and Management of the Muriqui (Oliveira et al. 2005).
There is a small, but promising, captive breeding programme for the species (Coimbra- Filho et al. 1993; Pissinatti et al. 1998; Pissinatti 2005). Captive breeding has been problematic due to low levels of reproduction and poor infant survival. Some zoos in São Paulo (for example, Sorocaba and Santos) receive wild-born muriqui pets every year, originating mostly from palm-harvesters and hunters who have killed the mother. Investment in a well-managed breeding programme helps greatly enhance our understanding of the primates and provides a backstop for population extinctions in the wild.
This species is listed on Appendix I of CITES.
Aguirre, A. C. 1971. O mono Brachyteles arachnoides. In: E. Geoffroy (ed.), Situação Atual da Espécie no Brasil, Academia Brasileira de Ciências, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Antonietto, L. A. and Mendes, F. D. C. 1994. São Francisco Xavier: A new site for primatological research and conservation in the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Neotropical Primates 2(3): 3-4.
Câmara, I. de G. 1995. Muriquis in the Itatiaia National Park, Brazil. Neotropical Primates 3(1): 19.
Carvalho, S., Ferrari, S. F. and Strier, K. B. 2004. Diet of a muriqui group (Brachyteles arachnoides) in continuous primary forest. Primates 45(3): 201-204.
Coimbra-Filho, A. F., Pissinatti, A. and Rylands, A. B. 1993. Breeding muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides) in captivity: the experience of the Rio de Janeiro Primate Centre (CPRJ-FEEMA) (Ceboidea, Primates). Journal of Wildlife Preservation Trusts 29: 66–77.
Cunha, A. A. 2003. Primates in the Serra dos Órgãos National Park: new records. Neotropical Primates 11(1): 49–51.
Cunha, A. A. 2004. Additional records of primates in the Serra dos Órgãos National Park. Neotropical Primates 12(1): 30–31.
Cunha, A. A. 2005. The dark side of “ecotourism” in a hotspot national park of the Atlantic forest of Brazil. Abstracts: XIX Annual Meeting for Conservation Biology, Vol. 1. Society for Conservation Biology, Universidade de Brasília, Brasília, Brazil.
Custódio-Filho, A., Negreiros, O. C., Dias, A. C. and Franco, G. A. D. C. 1992. Composição florística do estrato arbóreo do Parque Estadual de Carlos Botelho, SP. Segundo Congresso Nacional de Essências Nativas 1: 184–191.
da Fonseca, G. A., Lemos de Sá, R. M., Pope, T. R., Glander, K. E. and Struhsaker, T. T. 1991. A pilot study of genetic and morphological variation in the muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides) as a contribution to a long-term conservation management plan. World Wildlife Fund – US, Washington, DC, USA.
de Oliveira, M. M., Marini-Filho, O. J. and Campos, V. de O. 2005. The International Committee for the Conservation and Management of Atlantic Forest Atelids. Neotropical Primates 13: 101-104.
Garcia, V. L. A. 2005. Status of the muriqui (Brachyteles Spix, 1823) populations remaining in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Projeto Muriqui-Rio.
Garcia, V. L. A. and de Andrade Filho, J. M. 2002. Muriquis no Parque Nacional da Serra dos Órgãos.
Gonzalez-Solis, J., Guix, J. C., Mateos, E. and Llorens, L. 2001. Population density of primates in a large fragment of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest. Biodiversity and Conservation 10(8): 1267–1282.
Groves, C. P. 2001. Primate taxonomy. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Groves, C. P. 2005. Order Primates. In: D. E. Wilson and D. M. Reeder (eds), Mammal Species of the World, pp. 111-184. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Hill, W. C. O. 1962. Primates Comparative Anatomy and Taxonomy V. Cebidae Part B. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Koehler, A. B., Pereira, L. C. M. and Nícola, P. A. 2002. New locality for the woolly spider monkey, Brachyteles arachnoides (E. Geoffroy, 1806) in Paraná state and the urgency of strategies for conservation. Estudos de Biologia 24(49): 25–28.
Koehler, A. B., Pereira, L. C. M., Patricia A. Nicola, P. A., Ângelo, A. C. and Weber, K. S. 2005. The southern muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides, in the State of Paraná: current distribution, ecology, and the basis for a conservation strategy. Neotropical Primates 13: 67-72.
Lane, F. 1990. A hunt for “monos” (Brachyteles arachnoides) in the foothills of the Serra da Paranapiacaba, São Paulo, Brazil. Primate Conservation 11: 23–25.
Lemos de Sá, R. M. and Glander, K. E. 1993. Capture techniques and morphometrics for the woolly spider monkey, or muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides, E. Geoffroy 1806). American Journal of Primatology 29: 145-152.
Lemos de Sá, R. M., Pope, T. R., Glander, K. E., Struhsaker, T. T. and da Fonseca, G. A. B. 1990. A pilot study of genetic and morphological variation in the muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides). Primate Conservation 11: 26–30.
Marroig, G. and Sant`Anna, A. B. C. 2001. The occurrence of muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides) in the Itatiaia National Park, Brazil. Neotropical Primates 9(2): 75.
Martins, M. M. 2003. Estratégias Alimentares e Dispersão de Sementes por Alouatta guariba e Brachyteles arachnoides em Um Fragmento de Floresta Semidecídua. Doctoral Thesis, Universidade de São Paulo.
Martins, M. M. 2003. Forest fragments in Barreiro Rico, southeastern Brazil: the need for conservation action. Neotropical Primates 11(1): 55–56.
Martins, M. M. 2005. Density of primates in four semi-deciduous forest fragments of São Paulo, Brazil. Biodiversity Conserservation 14(10): 2321–2329.
Martins, M. M. 2005. The southern muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides: ecology of a population in a semideciduous forest fragment. Neotropical Primates 13: 61–65.
Martins, M. M. 2006. Comparative seed dispersal effectiveness of sympatric Alouatta guariba and Brachyteles arachnoides in southeastern Brazil. Biotropica 38(1): 57–63.
Martuscelli, P., Petroni, L. M. and Olmos, F. 1994. Fourteen new localities for the muriqui Brachyteles arachnoides. Neotropical Primates 2(2): 12–15.
Melo, F. R. and Dias, L. G. 2005. Muriqui populations reported in the literature over the last 40 years. Neotropical Primates 13: 19-24.
Milton, K. 1984. Habitat, diet and activity patterns of free-ranging wooly spider monkeys (Brachyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroy, 1806). International Journal of Primatology 5: 491-514.
Milton, K. 1985. Mating patterns of woolly spider monkeys, Brachyteles arachnoides: implications for female choice. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 17: 53–59.
Milton, K. 1985. Multimale mating and absence of canine tooth dimorphism in woolly spider monkeys (Brachyteles arachnoides). American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68: 519–523.
Milton, K. 1986. Ecological background and conservation priorities for woolly spider monkeys (Brachyteles arachnoides). In: K. Benirschke (ed.), Primates: The Road to Self-Sustaining Populations, pp. 241–250. Springer, New York, USA.
Milton, K. and de Lucca, C. 1984. Population estimate for Brachyteles at Fazenda Barreiro Rico, Sao Paulo State, Brazil. IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group Newsletter 4: 27-28.
Mittermeier, R. A., Valle, C. M. C., Alves, M. C., Santos, I. B., Pinto, L. P. S., Strier, K. B., Young, A. L., Veado, E. M., Constable, I. D., Paccagnella, S. G. and Lemos de Sá, R. M. 1987. Current distribution of the muriqui in the Atlantic forest region of Eastern Brazil. Primate Conservation 8: 143–149.
Moraes, P. L. 1992. Dispersão de sementes pelo mono-carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroy, 1806) no Parque Estadual de Carlos Botelho. Revista do Instituto Florestal, São Paulo 4: 1193–1198.
Moraes, P. L. R. 1992. Espécies utilizadas na alimentação no mono-carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroy, 1806) no Parque Estadual de Carlos Botelho. Revista do Instituto Florestal, São Paulo 4: 1206–1208.
Nishimura, A., da Fonseca, G. A. B., Mittermeier, R. A., Young, A. L., Strier, K. B. and Valle, C. M. C. 1988. The muriqui, genus Brachyteles. In: R. A. Mittermeier, A. B. Rylands, A. F. Coimbra-Filho and G. A. B. da Fonseca (eds), Ecology and Behavior of Neotropical Primates, Vol. 2, pp. 577–610. World Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC, USA.
Oliveira, M. and Manzatti, L. 1996. New location for the muriqui Brachyteles arachnoides in the state of São Paulo. Neotropical Primates 4(3): 84–85.
Pacagnella, S. 1991. Censo de população de monos-carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides) no Parque Estadual de Carlos Botelho, estado de São Paulo. In: A. B. Rylands and A. T. Bernardes (eds), A Primatologia no Brasil – 3, pp. 225–234. Sociedade Brasileira de Primatologia and Fundacao Biodiversitas, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Petroni, L. 1993. Aspectos da Ecologia e Comportamento do Mono-Carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides – E. Geoffroy, 1806 - Cebidae, Primates) na Fazenda Intervales, Serra de Paranapiacaba, São Paulo. Master’s Thesis, Pontíficia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul.
Petroni, L. 2000. Caracterização da Área de Uso e Dieta do Mono-Carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides, Cebidae-Primates) na Mata Atlântica, Serra de Paranapiacaba, SP. Doctoral Thesis, Universidade de São Paulo.
Pinto, L. P. S., Costa, C. M. R., Strier, K. B. and da Fonseca, G. A. B. 1993. Habitat, density and group size of primates in a Brazilian Tropical forest. Folia Primatologica 61: 135–143.
Pisciotta, K. 2002. The Paranapiacaba forest fragment. In: E. Mateos, J. C. Guix and K. Pisciotta (eds), Censuses of Vertebrates in a Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest Area, pp. 217. entre de Recursos de Biodiversitat Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Pissinatti, A. 2005. Management of muriquis (Brachyteles, Primates) in captivity. Neotropical Primates 13: 93-99.
Pissinatti, A., Coimbra-Filho, A. F. and Rylands, A. B. 1998. Observations on reproduction and behavior of the muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides, in captivity. Neotropical Primates 6(2): 40–45.
Rocha, C. F. D., Bergallo, H. G., Alves, M. A. S. and Sluys, M. V. 2003. A Biodiversidade nos Grandes Remanescentes Florestais no Estado do Rio de Janeiro e nas Restingas da Mata Atlântica. Univers Idade Estadula do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Instituto BIOMAS and Conservation International do Brasil, RiMa, São Carlos, Brazil.
Romanini-Oliveira, R. C., Saraiva, N. A., Martins, C. S. and Valladares-Padua, C. B. 2005. Observações preliminares do muriqui-do-sul (Brachyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroy, 1806) no Parque Nacional da Serra dos Órgãos, Rio de Janeiro. Programa e Livro de Resumos. XI Congresso Brasileiro de Primatologia: 43. Porto Alegre.
Rylands, A. B., Strier, K. B., Mittermeier, R. A., Borovansky, J. and Seal, U. S. 1998. Population and Habitat Viability Assessment for the Muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides). IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (CBSG), Apple Valley, Minnesota, USA.
Silva, M. M. 1999. Análise de Viabilidade de uma População de Muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides Geoffroy, 1806) em São Francisco Xavier, Serra da Mantiqueira – SP. Master’s Thesis, Departamento de Ecologia, Universidade de Brasília.
Silva, M. S. 1987. A fauna da Serra do Subaio, Guapimirim. Boletim FBCN 22: 71–78.
Strier, K. B. 1999. Faces in the Forest: The Endangered Muriqui Monkeys of Brazil. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Strier, K. B. and da Fonseca, G. A. B. 1997. The endangered muriqui in Brazil’s Atlantic Forest. Primate Conservation 17: 131–137.
Talebi, M. 2005. Factors Affecting Food Choice of the Endangered Southern Muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides, Primates, E. Geoffroy, 1806) in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge.
Talebi, M. and Soares, P. 2005. Conservation research on the southern muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides, in São Paulo state, Brazil. Neotropical Primates 13: 53-59.
Talebi, M., Bastos, A. and Lee, P. C. 2005. Diet of southern muriquis in continuous Brazilian Atlantic Forest. International Journal of Primatology 26(5): 1175–1187.
Talebi, M. G. 2004. The conservation of southern muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides – Primates, E. Geoffroy, 1806) in São Paulo state, Brazil. Folia Primatologica 75(1): 209.
Torres de Assumpção, C. 1983. An ecological study of the primates of southeastern Brazil, with a reappraisal of Cebus apella races. Doctoral Thesis, University of Edinburgh.
Torres de Assumpção, C. 1983. Ecological and behavioral information on Brachyteles arachnoides. Primates 24: 584–593.
Torres de Assumpção, C., Leitão-Filho, H. F. and Cesar, O. 1982. Descrição das matas da Fazenda Barreiro Rico, Estado de São Paulo. Revista Brasileira de Botânica 5: 53–66.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 1999. Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. World Heritage Committee. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Marrakech, Morocco.
Vale Verde Associação do Meio Ambiente. 2006. Website. Available at: www.valeverde.org.br.
Vaz, S. M. 1998. Sobre a occorência do muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides, em Mambucaba, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Neotropical Primates 6(2): 49–50.
Vieira, C. da C. 1944. Os simios do Estado de São Paulo. Papeis Avulsos, Zoologia, São Paulo 4: 1–31.
|Citation:||Mendes, S.L., de Oliveira, M.M., Mittermeier, R.A. & Rylands, A.B. 2008. Brachyteles arachnoides. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 24 October 2014.|
|Feedback:||If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please fill in the feedback form so that we can correct or extend the information provided|