Picking pithy plants: Pith selectivity by wild white‐faced capuchin monkeys, <i>Cebus imitator</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding diet selectivity is a longstanding goal in primate ecology. Deciphering when and why primates consume different resources can provide insights into their nutritional ecology as well as adaptations to food scarcity. Plant pith, the spongy interior of plant stems, is occasionally eaten by primates, but the context is poorly understood. We examine the ecological, mechanical, chemical, and nutritional basis of plant pith selection by a wild, frugivorous-omnivorous primate (Cebus imitator). We test the hypothesis that pith is a fallback food, that is, consumed when fruit is less abundant, and test for differences between plant species from which pith is eaten versus avoided. We collected 3.5 years of capuchin pith consumption data to document dietary species and analyzed "pith patch visits" in relation to fruit availability, visits to fruit patches, and climatic seasonality. We analyzed dietary and non-dietary species for relative pith quantity, mechanical hardness, odor composition, and macronutrient concentrations. Capuchins ate pith from 11 of ~300 plant species common in the dry forest, most commonly Bursera simaruba. We find that pith consumption is not directly related to fruit availability or fruit foraging but occurs most frequently (84% of patch visits) during the months of seasonal transition. Relative to common non-dietary species, dietary pith species have relatively higher pith quantity, have softer outer branches and pith, and contain more terpenoids, a class of bioactive compounds notable for their widespread medicinal properties. Our results suggest that greater pith quantity, lower hardness, and a more complex, terpenoid-rich odor profile contribute to species selectivity; further, as pith is likely to be consistently available throughout the year, the seasonality of pith foraging may point to zoopharmacognosy, as seasonal transitions typically introduce new parasites or pathogens. Our study furthers our understanding of how climatic seasonality impacts primate behavior and sheds new light on food choice by an omnivorous primate.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".