Vanzolini's bald-faced saki (Pithecia vanzolinii) is a saki monkey in the genus Pithecia, family Pitheciidae, the New World monkeys that also include the other titis, the sakis and the uakaris. The Mammal Diversity Database credits the species name to Hershkovitz, 1987 and lists its country distribution as Brazil. Its range is in western Brazil, and it is named after the Brazilian zoologist Paulo Vanzolini. Hershkovitz first described it as a subspecies of the bald-faced saki, and it was raised to full species status in 2014. After no records in nature for many years, an individual was photographed in the wild in 2017, and a survey of the Eiru River in early 2017 recorded 21 sightings of 12 groups totalling 34 individuals. Hunting of sakis by local people may threaten its survival. The Mammal Diversity Database gives its IUCN Red List status as Not Evaluated.
Facts
Classification
ThreatsBiological Resource Use 1 Relationship to People Living or Extinct Scientific Name Conservation Status Connections
Child Taxon Of
Source Taxon page for Pithecia vanzolinii, Vanzolini's bald-faced saki (Mammal Diversity Database)
In the Other Atlases
Found In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject is found.
Source Taxon page for Pithecia vanzolinii, Vanzolini's bald-faced saki (Mammal Diversity Database)Country distributionQuote, Country distribution
Country distribution Brazil
Sources
1. Vanzolini's bald-faced saki (Wikipedia)
Lead
(Pithecia vanzolinii)
Lead, threats
The hunting of sakis by locals may threaten their survival.
Lead, hunting
one individual was collected after being hunted for bush meat
View the Source2. Taxon page for Pithecia vanzolinii, Vanzolini's bald-faced saki (Mammal Diversity Database)
IUCN Red List status
IUCN Red List status Not Evaluated
Species status
Species status Living
Country distribution
Country distribution Brazil
Child Taxon Of: Pitheciidae, Taxonomy
Family: Pitheciidae
In Group: Primate Species, Taxonomy, order
Order: Primates
View the SourceReader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.