identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
697A8793FFCBFFE7FCEAFA5BFB53FC87.text	697A8793FFCBFFE7FCEAFA5BFB53FC87.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pygathrix nemaeus (Linnaeus 1771)	<div><p>2 The douc holotype</p><p>Brisson (1756: 205) first described “ Le grand Singe de la Cochinchine ” from a specimen sent to Réaumur ’ s museum, where Brisson was a natural history demonstrator. René-Antoine Ferchault de Réaumur (1683 – 1757) bequeathed his collections and manuscripts to the Academy of Sciences, but by royal decree, Buffon, director of the Jardin du Roi, appropriated them for the royal collection, known as the King ’ s cabinet (Farber 1972: 269; Morel 2010: 3). When Buffon (1766: 298, footnote) claimed to have received from M(onsieur) Poivre a monkey and its Cochinchinese name of Douc, the gift and information were second-hand. Morel (2010: 9) cited three letters from Poivre to Réaumur, enthusing about contributing to Réaumur ’ s collections. In one of these, dated 18 March 1754 from Mauritius, replying to letters of 27 November 1749 and 7 November 1750 received on 2 December 1753, Poivre expressed his pleasure at learning that the Cochinchina monkey had arrived intact:</p><p>*Corresponding author:Douglas Brandon-Įones, 22 Karenia Street,Bray Park, QLD 4500, Australia, E-mail: douglas@quadrumania.net</p><p>The Cochinchinese word for this animal is D ’ ouc, distinct from the monkey called khi in that language. I have seen the D ’ ouc only in Cochinchina where it is abundant. It lives on wild fruits; usually keeping to the trees where it moves with singular ease and agility. It seldom descends to the ground where it seems disconcerted by its ungainly bipedal gait. The one I sent you was shot dead and skinned in the field. I have tried unsuccessfully to keep them alive. The youngster I had, lived only a few days. The Cochinchinese assured me that they cannot be reared. The melancholy that overwhelms this animal on capture eventually kills it. That is all I know of this monkey species (Morel 2010: 30, here freely translated).</p><p>Khi is a Vietnamese word now used for the macaque. Colobine monkeys are called Voọc (Dang et al. 1994), of which D ’ ouc is presumably a mispronunciation, misspelling, or its V was misread as a D, the apostrophe indicating that the word has two syllables, with the stress on the second one. The Vietnamese word is unlikely to have changed, as Finlayson (1826: 251) listed Vock as the Siamese word for Year of the Monkey. Both words are akin to the Malay onomatopoeic vernacular name “ Berok ” (Flower 1900: 315) for the pigtailed macaque Macaca nemestrina (Linnaeus 1766) . People unable to make dental contact with the lip, commonly pronounce “ V ” as a “ B ”. Lacépède (1789: xii) reported the “ Guenon à long nez ” as occurring in Cochinchina. His informants, probably reliant on poor descriptions or illustrations of the Bornean proboscis monkey Nasalis larvatus (von Wurmb, 1784), were evidently further confused in claiming that its local name “ khî dôc ” means “ large monkey ”. Lecturing in 1828, É. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (1829: 13) questioned the then consensus that the genus Nasalis is invalid, but accepted this purported range extension.</p><p>Buffon (1766: 299) suspected that the douc also occurs in Madagascar because Flacourt (1658: 153, here translated) reported a “ white monkey usually on its hind legs, with a white tail, tanned cap and two tanned blotches on its flanks … this species called sifac lives on beans and is abundant near Andrivoure, Damboulombe and Ranoufoutchi ”. This surprisingly competent description of Verreaux ’ s sifaka Propithecus verreauxi Grandidier, 1867 barely resembles the douc, but bipedal locomotion in the douc, reported by Buffon (1766: 301) unsourced, evidently prompted his conflation of the two species.</p><p>Engendering two generic names, Lasiopyga Illiger 1811 (p. 68) and Pygathrix É. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire 1812 (p. 90), both meaning “ furry buttocks ”, Buffon (1789: 85, pl. 23) emphasized the absent ischial callosities with a dorsal view of the douc kneeling on a tree branch. Linnaeus (1771: 521) withheld his inspiration for the name Simia Nemaeus, but it may be relevant that the Nemean lion features mainly as the hide worn by its slayer, Heracles. Buffon had openly and fundamentally opposed Linnean taxonomy (Sloan 1976). Although illustrated with thighs apart, Buffon ’ s (1766, pl. 41) figure depicts no genitalia. These were probably missing in a skin without callosities, but Buffon ’ s (1766: 301) avowed ignorance of whether female doucs menstruate perhaps indicates that he assumed it female. Buffon ’ s (1789) plate 23 is equivocal, but the lateral corner of the white rump patch seems to have the semi-detached slight extension that Lippold (1977) found male-linked. I. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (1851: 12) listed the holotype (No. 26 of the old catalogue) as an adult female. Rode (1938: 207) also listed it as a female No. 26 (71) in poor condition, but claimed that Diard sent it in 1822. Supplying a colour photograph of presumably the same specimen in lateral view, Groves (2007, Figure 2) treated it as the holotype, without noting its gender.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/697A8793FFCBFFE7FCEAFA5BFB53FC87	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Brandon-Jones, Douglas	Brandon-Jones, Douglas (2024): The scientific discovery and subsequent history of the douc monkey Pygathrix nemaeus (Linnaeus, 1771) near Da Nang, Vietnam. Mammalia (Warsaw, Poland) 88 (4): 353-361, DOI: 10.1515/mammalia-2023-0144, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mammalia-2023-0144
697A8793FFCAFFE4FCC8FC5AFD47F863.text	697A8793FFCAFFE4FCC8FC5AFD47F863.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pygathrix nemaeus (Linnaeus 1771)	<div><p>3 The type locality of the douc</p><p>Pierre Poivre (1719 – 1786) of Lyon, first visited east Asia in 1740 as a missionary, aged 20. Too young for holy orders, his youth was thought advantageous for language acquisition. Poivre was expelled from the Cochinchina mission and subsequently pressed to leave Canton (now Guangzhou), China, but claimed that on his homeward voyage the amputation of his right forearm during a sea battle with the English on 25 January 1745 forced him to abandon ordination. He was temporarily imprisoned at Batavia (now Jakarta, Indonesia), so he improbably then had the holotype. The French East India Company accepted his proposal to open trade with Cochinchina and in June 1749, Poivre reached Pondicherry in India, where he was equipped and sent on, arriving at Haiphong harbour (near Hanoi, Vietnam) in August 1749. He left Cochinchina for Mauritius only six months later to realize his other objective of establishing spice plantations in the French colonies. In June 1750 he sailed for Canton and, after several months, on to the Philippines, reaching Manila in May 1751. Other than nutmeg, he failed to obtain spice plants, and arrived at Pondicherry in April 1753, and Mauritius in December. He sailed for Manila in May 1754, and for the Spice Islands (now the Maluku Islands, Indonesia) in January 1755, returning to Mauritius in June 1755. Departing in April 1756, he spent several months until September in Madagascar, was captured by the English in December, and released in April 1757. Deepening factions within the Company isolated Poivre and he retired to Lyon, aged 37. He remained in France until early 1767 (Maverick 1941), so he apparently collected the holotype in late 1749 or early 1750.</p><p>Haiphong is well beyond the geographic distribution of the douc (Fooden 1996, Figure 1h; Kirkpatrick 1998; Nadler et al. 2003), but Poivre ’ s journal recorded his arrival at Tourane (now Da Nang) on 29 August 1749 and sailing to Faifo (now Hoi An) on 1 September. He remained mostly onboard until 15 September when the ship returned to Tourane and fully disembarked. On 18 September he set off for Hue (the then capital of Cochinchina), crossing three mountains, including a tall, steep, rocky one (probably Mt Hai) whose extensive forests were teeming with diverse, interesting animals. He arrived at Hue on 22 September, in reputedly the rainiest year known. Poivre left Hue on 13 December, taking 7 h on 15 December to cross the “ montagne de Haï ” (Cordier 1887: 452), on which hunting and habitat disturbance were forbidden, for fear of offending the spirits. He arrived at Faifo on 17 December, returning on 21 December to Tourane, from where a two-hour canoe journey on 22 December to the foot of Mt Hai saved him a long day ’ s hard travel. Here he learnt that a boat hired to follow him from Hue had been deliberately wrecked with some of his possessions lost or stolen. He apprehended the skipper and took him to Hue on 25 December. On 13 January 1750, he set off for Faifo, descending by river all night, and sleeping at the foot of Mt Hai. Crossing the mountain on 15 January, he reached a cove overlooking Tourane bay, spent 16 January at Tourane, and then reembarked for Faifo. In the middle of the river were three or four massive white marble rocks appearing on maps as the “ Sera de Bougio ” (bugio is a Portuguese word for monkey) or “ montagne des Singes ” (Cordier 1887: 490) (now Ngu Hanh Son or Marble Mountains, not the modern-day Monkey Mountain), and renowned throughout Cochinchina for their extraordinary shape, with naturally formed paths, caves and small shelters. Then separated from the sea by a large sand flat, they seemed formerly marine, harboured monkey multitudes, and were covered with small shrubs whose roots entangled numerous large rock masses. Poivre reached Faifo at dawn on 17 January. On 4 February he moved to Tourane, sailing on 13 February 1750, after three days of adverse wind. Poivre himself therefore seems to have had little opportunity to collect the holotype, but on 23 November a mandarin warned him of the fateful consequences of Poivre ’ s crew hunting with guns in consecrated mountains on days of prohibition (Cordier 1887). The incompleteness of the holotype skin, preserved only with mandible and foot bones (Daubenton 1766: 302), indicates that a crew member shot it for meat near Tourane, while awaiting Poivre ’ s return.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/697A8793FFCAFFE4FCC8FC5AFD47F863	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Brandon-Jones, Douglas	Brandon-Jones, Douglas (2024): The scientific discovery and subsequent history of the douc monkey Pygathrix nemaeus (Linnaeus, 1771) near Da Nang, Vietnam. Mammalia (Warsaw, Poland) 88 (4): 353-361, DOI: 10.1515/mammalia-2023-0144, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mammalia-2023-0144
697A8793FFCFFFE3FF78F943FB97FC10.text	697A8793FFCFFFE3FF78F943FB97FC10.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Pygathrix nemaeus (Linnaeus 1771)	<div><p>5 Douc specimens collected near Da Nang</p><p>I. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (1851: 12) recorded that in 1837, near Tourane on the Bonite expedition, Eydoux and Souleyet collected a male foetus with the triangular patch at its tail base already evident. Eydoux and Souleyet (1841: xiv) were at Tourane from 25 January to 4 February 1837, but said nothing of the douc. Perhaps this was the youngster collected on the Favorite expedition. Probably similarly confused, Anderson (1879: 41) claimed, without corroboration, that: “ The naturalists of the ‘Bonite’ encountered it in numerous troops near Tourane ”.</p><p>I. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (1851: 12) also recorded an immature female from “ Cochinchine ”, collected on the Danaïde expedition and donated to the Muséum National d ’ Histoire Naturelle, Paris, in 1843 by (Naval Officer, Lieutenant Jean-Louis-Charles) Jaurès (1808 – 1870). Regrettably, this important expedition is largely unpublished.</p><p>Between 5 and 12 June 1897 on the (Son-Cha = Son Tra, see below) peninsula where sighting doucs was easy, Barthélemy (1901: 342) obtained two live ones. They were gentle and shy. He believed the species, thought endemic to Tourane bay, too delicate for previous live transport to France. Barthélemy ’ s (1898: 9) died in July 1897 after a fortnight at the Jardin des Plantes, Paris. Captive ones settlers kept in Tourane soon died, generally by selfstarvation, self-strangulation or, as Barthélemy ’ s (1898) magnificent large male did in its cage, by stunning themselves. (A possible cause is mineral deficiency decalcifying the cranial bones, making the brain more vulnerable to impact, see Brandon-Jones and Goudsmit [2022: 338 – 342].) Barthélemy ’ s (1901) consolation was that (Alphonse) Milne-Edwards subjected them to interesting studies. Their natural diet was lentisk berries and other mountain plants; they liked bananas, and for much of the voyage Barthélemy (1898) accustomed them to bread. Their copious water consumption led him to blame thirst for their melancholy, which otherwise implied reasoning capacity. Captivity seemed to affect their temperament, however, and next year he hoped to observe them in the wild.</p><p>Jean Delacour and Willoughby P. Lowe collected an adult female douc ZD.1926.10.4.5 (“ Iris brown. Face pale terra-cotta. Cheeks white. Hands black. Thighs black. Between thighs white. ”) on 20 November 1925, and an adult male ZD.1926.10.4.4 (“ Iris light brown. Face pale reddish. Chin cream. Hands black. Sexular [sic] region white. ”) on 3 February 1926 at Col des Nuages, 1200 ft (400 m) (Napier 1985: 86; Thomas 1927: 43), the more recent name for Taysons pass (now Deo Hai Van, 16°12 ′ N 108°08 ′ E). On 7 February 1926 they also collected there ZD.1926.10.4.7, an adult female M. arctoides (Fooden 1996: 878) . Thomas (1927: 42) misled Kirkpatrick (1998: 340) into duplicating this locality, creating a doppelgänger in Laos. A juvenile female USNM.269800 collected in January 1940 at Col des Nuages by J(oseph) F. Rock was the last douc recorded there until about 70 were discovered in about 3300 ha of forest on 10 November 2016. The opening of a road tunnel under the pass in 2005 may have alleviated the impact of road traffic (Anon 2016). Lowe (1947: 28) described the locality thus:</p><p>The road was steep and wound round sharp curves as we ascended the mountain. At times we caught a glimpse of the breakers dashing against the rocks beneath.The further we went the thicker the forest became. We presently arrived at a small bungalow, at 1,200 ft., which we decided to make our headquarters for several days … It was a very wet locality, as its name implies. Rain and fog are of daily occurrence. Here was a favoured spot for rare and beautiful birds. Many occurred that had never been seen in the wild state by a white man; such as the Imperial Pheasant which lives in the densely-forested and leech-infested mountains … Then again there is a large shy and elusive Cuckoo [(Footnote) Carpococcyx renauldi] living in the thickets and vine-covered retreats, where it is impossible to follow, much less to see it … We were especially anxious to find the handsome yellow-handed [(Footnote) Callosciurus flavimanus] species, first mentioned in 1832 and since then unknown … we secured a series of [this squirrel] for the British and Paris Museums …</p><p>As with macaques, Van Peenen et al. (1971: 134) infrequently saw roadside doucs on Mt. Sontra (16°07 ′ N 108°18 ′ E), the mountain complex on the peninsula forming the eastern rim of Tourane Bay, but from 1965 to 1967 they were often seen in the lower branches of roadside trees at elevations from 200 m to the top of Peak 647 (the peaks were denoted by their altitudes in metres). From a tree about 60 m away, a troop of three doucs quietly watched traps being set in a rubbish dump near Peak 647 in September 1967, and in the late afternoon individuals were commonly seen eating leaves or grooming themselves. When disturbed, large males sometimes demonstratively brachiated to and fro. Doucs were observed in all forested parts of the peninsula, including rainforest, but were seen on the ground only momentarily when fleeing. As an endangered species, none were collected, but Van Peenen et al. (1971: 135) skinned seven confiscated from poachers or inadvertently shot by sentries. Relatively undisturbed rainforest occurred on the northern slopes between 300 and 650 m, with trees of 40 m and above, and a second canopy of young trees. Climbing vines and epiphytes were common, but the sparse undergrowth made the forest accessible, often with 10 m visibility. Where felling had occurred, most trees, neither predominantly deciduous nor broadleaf evergreen, attained 15 m, with occasional taller ones and deep, dense, impenetrable undergrowth of vines, shrubs, thorny palms and bamboo-like clusters. Dry forest was extensive at lower elevations, especially on the south side, primarily of woody vines and dense, low shrubs, but short, often gnarled and twisted trees were common (Van Peenen et al. 1971: 130).</p><p>The seven douc specimens are an adult male USNM.356576 and a juvenile female USNM.356575 J. T. Lowery collected on 12 February 1966; an adult male USNM.356577 and an adult female USNM.356574 T. J. McIntyre and P. F. Ryan, respectively, collected on 13 February 1966; an adult male USNM.357628 D. Van Peenen collected on 12 March 1969; and two males USNM.357766-7 without skulls, but adult body size, R. H. Light collected on 29 April 1969 . Only the first four specimens have field measurements, and the locality of USNM.357628 is given as “ 2 km E &amp; 8 km. N of Mt. Sontra Peak ”; that of USNM.357766 “ 3. 5 km E &amp; 1. 5 km. N of Mt. Sontra ”. The National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., also has two specimens with locality: “ Presequ ’ ile [sic] de Tien Sha, Danang ”. The first is an adult male USNM.358107 D. H. Manley collected in spring 1967; the second a subadult female USNM.356854 G. S. Jones collected in July 1967 . Tien Sha (now Tien Sa) is an earlier name for the Son Tra Peninsula. Its short (about 10 km) distance from Da Nang makes it the best candidate as type locality for P. nemaeus, should further restriction be desirable. Fooden (1996: 889) added an adult female skull FCXM 002 collected on 21 May 1984, and a female unnumbered skin collected in November 1989, both preserved at the Forestry College of Vietnam, Xuan Mai. The dark grey shank of the skin (Fooden 1996: 865) accords with Pygathrix cinerea Nadler, 1997, indicating mistaken provenance.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/697A8793FFCFFFE3FF78F943FB97FC10	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Brandon-Jones, Douglas	Brandon-Jones, Douglas (2024): The scientific discovery and subsequent history of the douc monkey Pygathrix nemaeus (Linnaeus, 1771) near Da Nang, Vietnam. Mammalia (Warsaw, Poland) 88 (4): 353-361, DOI: 10.1515/mammalia-2023-0144, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/mammalia-2023-0144
