Search

Jumping is a crucial behavior in fitness-critical activities including locomotion, resource acquisition, courtship displays and predator avoidance. In primates, paleontological evidence suggests selection for enhanced jumping ability during their early evolution. However, our interpretation of the fossil record remains limited, as no studies have explicitly linked levels of jumping performance with interspecific skeletal variation. We used force platform analyses to generate biomechanical data on maximal jumping performance in three genera of callitrichine monkeys falling along a continuum of jumping propensity: Callimico (relatively high propensity jumper), Saguinus (intermediate jumping propensity) and Callithrix (relatively low propensity jumper). Individuals performed vertical jumps to perches of increasing height within a custom-built tower. We coupled performance data with high-resolution micro-CT data quantifying bony features thought to reflect jumping ability. Levels of maximal performance between species - e.g. maximal take-off velocity of the center of mass (CoM) - parallel established gradients of jumping propensity. Both biomechanical analysis of jumping performance determinants (e.g. CoM displacement, maximal force production and peak mechanical power during push-off) and multivariate analyses of bony hindlimb morphology highlight different mechanical strategies among taxa. For instance, Callimico, which has relatively long hindlimbs, followed a strategy of fully extending of the limbs to maximize CoM displacement - rather than force production - during push-off. In contrast, relatively shorter-limbed Callithrix depended mostly on relatively high push-off forces. Overall, these results suggest that leaping performance is at least partially associated with correlated anatomical and behavioral adaptations, suggesting the possibility of improving inferences about performance in the fossil record., Competing Interests: Competing interests The authors declare no competing or financial interests., (© 2024. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd.)

Arboreal environments present considerable biomechanical challenges for animals moving and foraging among substrates varying in diameter, orientation and compliance. Most studies of quadrupedal gait kinematics in primates and other arboreal mammals have focused on symmetrical walking gaits and the significance of diagonal sequence gaits. Considerably less research has examined asymmetrical gaits, despite their prevalence in small-bodied arboreal taxa. Here, we examined whether and how free-ranging callitrichine primates adjust asymmetrical gait kinematics to changes in substrate diameter and orientation, as well as how variation in gait kinematics affects substrate displacement. We used high-speed video to film free-ranging Saguinus tripartitus and Cebuella pygmaea inhabiting the Tiputini Biodiversity Station, Ecuador. We found that S. tripartitus used bounding and half-bounding gaits on larger substrates versus gallops and symmetrical gaits on smaller substrates, and also shifted several kinematic parameters consistent with attenuating forces transferred from the animal to the substrate. Similarly, C. pygmaea shifted from high-impact bounding gaits on larger substrates to using more half-bounding gaits on smaller substrates; however, kinematic adjustments to substrate diameter were not as profound as in S. tripartitus Both species adjusted gait kinematics to changes in substrate orientation; however, gait kinematics did not significantly affect empirical measures of substrate displacement in either species. Because of their small body size, claw-like nails and reduced grasping capabilities, callitrichines arguably represent extant biomechanical analogs for an early stage in primate evolution. As such, greater attention should be placed on understanding asymmetrical gait dynamics for insight into hypotheses concerning early primate locomotor evolution. ., Competing Interests: Competing interestsThe authors declare no competing or financial interests., (© 2020. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd.)