Cheek pouches are pockets between the jaw and the cheek used to temporarily store food. Many rodents, marsupials and monkeys have them. Apes and New World monkeys do not have cheek pouches. Old World monkeys have cheek pouches but do not use them with the same frequency. For instance, baboons in the wild don't seem to use their cheek pouches as much as they do in captivity. It was long believed that cheek pouches were the result of an adaptation to ground foraging, to store food in high risk situation while on the ground and consume it later high in a tree, however Ciochon and Feagle argue that cercopithecines who live mostly arboreal have the largest cheek pouches. ( Primate Evolution and Human Origins ). Unlike those of rodents, primates' cheek pouches secrete large quantities of amylase - which converts starches into sugar. In her book " Primate Behavioral Ecology ", Karen Strier writes: " this adaptation for digesting unrip fruits, which are o...
Assuming we agree the theory of mind applies to monkeys and apes, what could prevent us from thinking that, much like our early human ancestors, they too lend significance to external phenomena they have no control over? Thunder, fire, the moon, the sun, waterfalls can stir awe, wonder or fear in humans. Why couldn't the same natural phenomena stir similar emotions in animals? In "J.T., JR, The Biography of an African Monkey" (1928), Delia J. Akeley , first wife of the famous taxidermist Carl Akeley , recounts her life with J.T. the female vervet monkey she adopted and whom she studied. She writes: "While the porters were busy cutting down the undergrowth to clear a site for the tents, I gathered an armful of flowers and maidenhair ferns. I was arranging them in a paraffin tin (my safari vase) when J.T., who was tied to the limb of a tree, attracted my attention by her excited manner and peculiar cries. In an effort to learn the cause of her agitation I ...
How we treat great apes (and other animals for that matter) is a question that has been gaining momentum the last few years. Organizations like The Non-Human Rights Project argue that a legal status, other than that of "property" should be granted to great apes in particular. I could not agree more. Animals are not objects and should not be considered as such by the law, no matter which country they live in. We do know that animals (from mice to apes) have feelings and experience empathy ** (see references below) - so how can we justify trading them as mere junk? The question is even more pertinent when it comes to the ethical treatment of great apes in facilities using them for the greater good - (think medical research). Progress has been made and it seems that we (humans) are now moving towards a consensus that medical research should move away from animal testing where other solutions apply. However, some argue that computer simulation, in vitro testing cann...
Comments
Post a Comment