Systematics of the Saguinus oedipus group of the bare-face tamarins: evidence from facial morphology.

Abstract

The systematics of the Saguinus oedipus group within the bare-face tamarins remains open to question. Hershkovitz (Living New World Monkeys (Platyrrhini), Vol.1. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977) places the cotton-top and rufus-naped tamarins as subspecies of Saguinus oedipus (S. o. oedipus and S. o. geoffroyi, respectively). In contrast, several other authors have argued that these two taxa should be considered separate species (S. oedipus and S. geoffroyi). Phylogenetic relationships within the group are also disputed. Resolving these different interpretations has been difficult in part because no study of this group has included an objective measure of expected levels of specific vs. subspecific variation. We used facial measurements from 179 adult crania to address the systematics of this group and included a related species that is known to include multiple subspecies. Our sample included three taxa from the S. oedipus group of the bare-face tamarins (S. oedipus, S. geoffroyi, and S. leucopus) and six subspecies from the related hairy-face tamarin species S. fuscicollis. Comparisons to S. leucopus provided a relative measure of species-level differences. Analyses that included S. fuscicollis provided a measure of subspecific variation. There was no evidence of facial sexual dimorphism in any of these taxa. A variety of multivariate statistical analyses including discriminant function and cluster analysis suggest that S. oedipus and S. geoffroyi differ morphologically at a level consistent with species-level distinctions. The extent of differences between these taxa is large. The differences in their facial morphology was on the order of differences between S. oedipus or S. geoffroyi and S. leucopus rather than the extent of variation among S. fuscicollis subspecies. Furthermore, a comparison of collecting localities revealed that the variation we observed among S. oedipus and S. geoffroyi was not clinical but presented a large morphological discontinuity at the boundary between taxa. Our analyses also suggested that S. leucopus is more similar to S. oedipus than is either to S. geoffroyi. Finally, it may be that there are some distinct species within the S. fuscicollis group. However, this hypothesis, along with other phylogenetic relationships suggested by this study, will require more data and further study.