Although empirical data are necessary to describe new species, their discoveries can be guided from the survey of the so-called circumstantial evidence (that indirectly determines the existence or nonexistence of a fact). Yet this type of evidence, generally linked to traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), is often disputed by field biologists due to its uncertain nature and, on account of that, generally untapped by them. To verify this behavior and the utility of circumstantial evidence, we reviewed the existing literature about the species of apes and monkeys described or rediscovered since January 1, 1980 and submitted a poll to the authors. The results show that circumstantial evidence has proved to be useful in 40.5% of the examined cases and point to the possibility that its use could speed up the process at the heart of the discovery and description of new species, an essential step for conservation purposes.
Primates – Springer Journals
Published: Jun 4, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud