Laboratory Primate Newsletter

VOLUME 24 NUMBER 4 OCTOBER 1985

CONTENTS

Articles and Notes

Interview with the Director of the NIH Office for Protection from Research Risks........1

Use of Nylon Balls as Behavioral Modifier for Caged Primates, by D. M. Renquist & F. J. Judge

........4

Parasitic Arthropods of Bushbabies (Galago Senegalensis and G. Crassicaudatus) Recently Imported to the U.S.A., by L. A. Durden, D. L. Sly, & A. T. Buck........ 5

News, Information, and Announcements

Macaca mulatta Available from China for Exchange........6

Tissues Available........6

Editor's Note: The New NIH Animal Care Guidelines........7

Upcoming Primate Meetings........8
. . . IPS, ASP

News Briefs........9
. . . Animal Research Bills Progressing Through Congress; University of Pennsylvania Fined; Grant Funds for City of Hope Suspended

Addenda to Graduate Programs Directory ........9

Pre-Doctoral Fellowship Available........18

Cartoon

Departments

Recent Books and Articles ........10

Contents of Volumes 22-24 (1983-1985) appear at the end of this issue

* * *

Interview with the Director of the NIH Office for Protection from Research Risks

The following are excerpts from an article in the NIH Record, 1985, 37, No. 17, describing an interview conducted by the Editor of the Record with Dr. Charles McCarthy, Director of the NIH Office for Protection from Research Risks (OPRR).

Q. [Assuming] that we are always going to have to use some animals in experiments, what can we do to eliminate unnecessary pain and unnecessary trauma in those necessary experiments that we may not be doing now?

A. Well, what can we do that we're not doing now, I'm not so sure.

But let me tell you some of the things we are doing. First, our new policy requires that before NIH will even accept an application it must be reviewed by a committee in the [potential grantee's] institution that assures us that the number of animals is not unnecessarily large or too small to get good results because, either way, animals might be wasted. Secondly, there must be reasons why a given species is used in the research. Where possible, species lower on the phylogenetic scale are preferred over species that are higher and so there is an emphasis on not using the more complex organisms in research. Finally, here at NIH the peer review system seeks justification for the use of animals.

So all kinds of protection are built into the system and if a question is raised anywhere then we put a hold on and that research cannot be funded until we have resolved the question.

Q. What agency or office within NIH is in charge of the overseeing of intramural care and use of animals within NIH's own laboratories?

A. That comes under the NIH Animal Research Committee that is chaired by Dr. Robert A. Whitney Jr. and it reports to Dr. Joseph S. Rall, the Deputy Director for Intramural Research. So they have that responsibility. Now their policy was developed and published prior to the new Public Health Service's policy but on all significant points the two policies are in agreement. So we don't have two sets of standards -- one for the intramural (inside NIH) and one for the extramural -- but there are some technical details in which they are different. Generally speaking, they agree.

Q. That brings us to the extramural system: the animals and their use in laboratories and institutions outside NIH which funds the projects. Who oversees them and how do they go about it?

A. That part is overseen by the Office for Protection from Research Risks. And our office, although located organizationally at NIH, has responsibility for all animals that are involved in research supported by any of the Public Health Service agencies. So it is Public Health Service policy that we implement, not simply an NIH policy -- though because NIH is the biggest -- it's sometimes referred to as the NIH policy.

Q. But NIH is not a regulatory agency as such, designed to impose penalties, is it?

A. That's why we do this in the name of the PHS which has delegated regulatory responsibility from the Secretary of the Dept. of Health and Human Services.

Q. So, if you find something in an NIH or PHS grant that is wrong, NIH does have a regulatory power.

A. It comes to the equivalent of that. We implement what is called "policy" and the policy for practical purposes is little different than a regulation. As far as the institutions that are affected by it, there is no difference.

Q. So, the PHS as a whole has delegated authority from the Secretary to do certain things.

A. Yes. Our policy actually constitutes conditions under which awards may be made. In other words, if an institution accepts an award it accepts the responsibility to treat the animals in a humane way consistent with our policy.

Q. And of course you could suspend a grant or withdraw it for violations involving animals.

A. Yes, we have very strong sanctions available to us. We can either suspend a portion of an award, the entire award, or in an extreme case, we can suspend all of an institution's awards involving animals. And we have recently done the latter in one case. We have done it in a major institution.

Q. But the U.S. Department of Agriculture has another kind of authority -- similar -- but with different kinds of inspections and different kinds of penalties?

A. Yes. The USDA has responsibility for implementing the Animal Welfare Act. The Animal Welfare Act pertains to most animals with the exception of rats and mice. And since somewhere in the range of 90 percent of all research animals are rats and mice, there are many institutions that are not directly supervised or inspected by the USDA.

Secondly, the Animal Welfare Act specifically excludes research activities so that our policy really affects the care of animals including rats and mice which are not covered by the USDA as well as the use made of animals in a research context which is not covered by USDA. Nevertheless, we do work closely with them.

Q. Coming back to NIH, your office -- OPRR -- is the one that decides whether an investigation should be made. On what basis do you decide that?

A. Well, whenever we receive an allegation of noncompliance with PHS policy, we initiate an inquiry. If that inquiry leads us to believe there may be serious problems then we elevate the inquiry to a full-scale investigation.

Q. If you have to go to a full-scale investigation, who actually conducts it? Do you delegate it to some inspectors or investigators?

A. Normally (OPRR) conducts it, but we borrow personnel from various institutes and we frequently contract with outside experts to assist us.

Q. So whoever does the investigating knows what to look for and how to assess it?

A. Yes, that is correct.

Q. There's been some controversy and a charge that there's been a delay in the University of Pennsylvania head injury investigation. How long did it take and was it longer than ordinary and was there justification for the length of it?

A. It's hard for me to say what is ordinary because some investigations are very brief. In fact, most others have taken as long or longer than the University of Pennsylvania. The reason for the extended investigation at the University of Pennsylvania was that the principal evidence in that case was stolen evidence. And the people in possession of that information declined to turn it over to us for nearly a year.

We received that evidence on May 23 of this year and it consisted of approximately 80 hours of videotape, which had to be carefully analyzed. So between May 23 and mid-July most of that tape was reviewed up to five times and documentation was made on every single animal and the treatment of every single animal; some 47 animals were depicted on the tape and we then completed a report based on our analysis of the entire set of tapes. We think the investigation was really completed in a rather short time once the evidence was in hand. But the evidence was stolen one year prior to its being turned over to the NIH.

Q. Assuming you find there is some violation of the rules and regulations in a given project -- and that it warrants some kind of penalty -- what are the different kinds of things you can do and on what basis do you do them?

A. Well, we try to make the punishment fit the crime. There are two categories of noncompliance: the first and the more common is that an institution's administration of its animal policy or facilities has fallen below acceptable standards. In that case, we hold the institution responsible for bringing the policies or facilities into compliance with the PHS policy.

In a few cases, the facilities and the institution may be functioning properly but the investigator has broken the rules. In which case, we try to make the sanctions pertain to a given project or to a specific investigator since it doesn't seem to be the entire institution that's out of line.

Q. So NIH has adequate, ample power to remedy malpractices when it finds them.

A. Yes, but we feel that our investigations have to be very carefully carried out because in the event that we have negative findings, the accused have the right to appeal. Those appeals are reviewed according to very rigorous administrative procedures and consequently the evidence we have to have must be conclusive. So we cannot -- simply on the basis of casual allegations -- bring about sanctions. If we can develop demonstrable evidence, then we take appropriate action. These inquiries and investigations are carried out, at least from our point of view, in a confidential manner.

Frequently, the institution or the investigator will give statements to the press so not all of them are carried out in a confidential manner. But, so far as we're concerned, they're to be treated confidentially and the results are made public only when we have completed the investigation.

Q. So if there is any statement before conclusion of the investigation it would be on the part of the individual or institution, not NIH.

A. That is correct. It should be made clear that in the implementation of our policy we rely primarily on the statement of each institution that they will be in compliance with the policy and we accept that on good faith. We're not quite so naive as to think that simply putting something on paper always means that institutions are going to be in compliance. Consequently we do have a series of site visits to randomly selected institutions.

We've carried out approximately 18 of these since 1983 in addition to investigations for cause and we are continuing to carry out random site visits. That's still a small percentage of a total number of institutions but the word is out in the community that any institution is subject to receiving a visit virtually unannounced.

When we visit a site, what we look at are administrative records going back three years, minutes of the animal care committee going back three years. We interview investigators, veterinarians, and members of the Institution's Animal Care and Use Committee. We look at the facilities, we check the records of when food was procured, when cages were procured, and check these against the arrival of animals and so on.

What our site visits concentrate on is not particular shortcomings but on the quality of the administration of the program and that's the difference from USDA. USDA looks for specific shortcomings: the cage is dirty or rusty, the cagewasher doesn't work, etc.

What we look at is, does the institution have an appropriate administrative structure to deal with the problems that inevitably are going to arise in an animal program? Do they have a good engineering staff so that if something breaks it will be immediately fixed? If the plumbing gets plugged with animal hair will it be corrected immediately? Do they have a way of obtaining a new cagewasher if the old one breaks down?

Is there central procurement so that an investigator can order animals and not have them waiting out on the loading docks in wooden crates because the cages haven't arrived yet?

Those are the kind of questions that we look at; we try to get at the root of the matter.

Q. Under new regulations with more random site visits and an intensified education program, what specific things can you think of that will make it more likely there will be improved future care and use of laboratory animals?

A. Well, I think ultimately we need to get away from a regulatory stance and stress an educational effort and to that end we held a national symposium last year. We have followed up with regional meetings around the country. We have begun this process and have scheduled 8 regional meetings in this calendar year and will continue to hold these regional meetings.

We will try to reach investigators, administrators, veterinarians and other persons who have responsibility for running a good program. And we think ultimately the way to make sure that we have good programs is to sensitize people. We feel we would prefer not to do that through disciplining them or punishing them but rather through educating them. We do not consider ourselves so much a regulatory office as an educative and sensitizing office and we think that is ultimately the way to make something happen.

* * *

Use of Nylon Balls as Behavioral Modifier for Caged Primates

David M. Renquist and Francis J. Judge
National Institutes of Health

Nonhuman primates individually caged for long-term research projects in fields such as nutrition or carcinogenesis sometimes develop behavioral aberrations including rolling in the cage, frequent masturbation, self-mutilation, etc. Primate specialists have attempted to solve the problem by changing the cage location, manipulating the diet, increasing cage size, and providing various play objects. However, these approaches are sometimes impractical and may not rectify or prevent the problem. Most of the play objects used either are, or become, hazardous to the animal, get in the way of experimental manipulations in the cage, become unsanitary, or are quickly destroyed.

Recently use of a hard nylon ball* approximately 2 1/4 in. in diameter was evaluated as a "play object" to prevent or reduce long-term housing related behavioral aberrations. The nature and size of the ball prevent it from being destroyed or thrown out of standard monkey cages housing animals less than 15 kg, e.g., Hazelton Systems and Allentown hanging cages. The animals play with the ball by rolling it in the cage. Adult females hold it as a surrogate infant. Stumptail macaques often chew the ball. The hardness of the ball prevents it from being destroyed even with the most vigorous primate use. The ball easily rolls when the cage squeeze apparatus is utilized; this eliminates any problem with experimental manipulation.

The ball is considered as part of the cage and can be sterilized (220degF) or easily sanitized with the cage through the cage washer (180degF). The inert nature of the nylon renders it nontoxic, and any chewed particles pass through the intestinal tract. The Primate Unit at present has approximately 1,000 balls in use for macaques. The balls have been in use for six months. Smaller balls are available and could be used for smaller species of primates. The only problem occurred when a ball accidently dropped into a floor drain and blocked it.

Improving the environmental conditions of laboratory animals increases the quality of research by reducing stress. Public concern about animal welfare and the humane treatment of nonhuman primates and other research animals has also focused on improving conditions for caged or restrained animals. Laboratory animal specialists therefore find a continuing need to improve environmental conditions for animals involved in research projects. We feel that the use of an effective "play object" as described is a simple and inexpensive way of providing a more enriched environment for nonhuman primates in conventional laboratory housing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Authors' address: Veterinary Resources Branch, Division of Research Services, National Institutes of Health, Bldg. 14G, Rm. 102, Bethesda, MD 20205.

Names of commercial manufacturers and trade names are provided for identification only and inclusion does not imply endorsement by the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Public Health Service, or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

* Nylaball, Nylabone Corp., P.O. Box 27, Neptune, NJ 07753. [We are informed by the company that this product is available through local pet shops. --Ed.]

Editor's Note.--We obtained a sample Nylaball and thought that it is worth mentioning that it is quite hard and made a fairly loud noise when it was dropped in one of our metal cages. While it is doubtful that all or a large number of monkeys in a colony room would be constantly dropping these balls, if they did so it would surely make quite a racket. We have not had enough experience with them to comment on their usefulness. In reply, the author noted that "noise has not been a problem with the 800 macaques [in his] Primate Unit; however, several primates use the ball to rub against the cage bars. This is infrequent and not habitual in the animals observed."

--------------------------------------------------------------------

* * *

Parasitic Arthropods of Bushbabies (Galago Senegalensis and G. Crassicaudatus) Recently Imported to the U.S.A.

L. A. Durden, D. L. Sly, & A. T. Buck
Vanderbilt University School of Medicine

Ectoparasites and other arthropod parasites of captive bushbabies are poorly documented. Kohn & Haines (1982) did not record parasitic arthropods from bushbabies in their treatment of prosimian diseases. In their native Africa the bushbabies Galago senegalensis and G. demidovii are occasionally infested by the polyplacid sucking louse, Lemurphthirus galagus, whereas the bushbabies G. senegalensis, G. demidovii and G. crassicaudatus have been recorded as hosts for the congeneric Lemurphthirus stigmosus (e.g., Bedford, 1927; Ferris, 1954; Kim & Emerson, 1970, 1973). Similarly, the mites Lemurnyssus galagoensis and Galagalges congolensis have been recorded from G. senegalensis in Africa (Fain, 1957, 1963). Larval and nymphal stages of linguatulid (pentastomid) tongue worms parasitize many vertebrates in this region with little host specificity.

Breeding colonies of bushbabies (G. senegalensis and G. crassicaudatus) maintained at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (V.U.M.C.) are typically parasite-free, so that any supplemental animals received from wild stock must be quarantined and checked for infections or infestations prior to incorporation with these colonies. Most wild-caught bushbabies generally appear to be free of parasitic arthropods on arrival at the V.U.M.C. facilities, but some interesting cases recorded there warrant documentation.

On 9 November, 1983, 10 adult female G. senegalensis recently imported from Kenya were received at the above-mentioned facilities and were examined on arrival under quarantine conditions. All animals were generally in poor physical condition and louse eggs (nits) were recorded on six of them; these were cemented to pelage underfur hairs as is fairly typical for sucking lice (Anoplura). Nit densities were heavy (c. 500 nits per animal) on two of these animals and much lighter (10-50 nits each) on the other four infested animals. No lice were recorded. Microscopic examination of samples of these nits revealed that they had hatched previously (hatched, empty, louse eggs often remain attached to their host hair until the next host pelage molt). Although there are presently no identification keys to the vast majority of louse eggs, it seems very likely that the louse genus involved was Lemurphthirus since other genera do not normally occur on bushbabies.

On 21 November, 1983, 10 adult G. crassicaudatus (five males, five females) recently imported from Tanzania were received. All appeared to be in good health on arrival. On 14 January, 1984, however, one of the adult females died. Routine autopsy revealed the presence of about 60 encysted tongue worm nymphs belonging to the genus Armillifer. The species involved cannot be ascertained since the worms were not cultured to adults but they appear to be A. armillatus. The serosal surfaces of the abdominal viscera supported most cysts but some were located inside the liver lobes, spleen, diaphragm, and one lung. Although spectacular, these nymphs did not appear to have contributed to the death of this animal. Armillifer spp. tongue worms typically utilize snakes (particularly pythons) as definitive hosts where they invade the lungs, trachea and nasal passages. Eggs are released by adult worms in these sites and become attached to the surrounding vegetation via the nasal secretions of the snake. Other vertebrates (notably mammals) may ingest these eggs during foraging activities and act as intermediate hosts (as in the present infestation). Eggs hatch into larvae in the gut of the intermediate host and then penetrate its intestinal mucosa eventually molting to nymphs prior to encystment in the viscera. Transmission to the definitive snake host occurs when the intermediate host or its infested organs are consumed by these predators (Cheng, 1974).

References

Bedford, G. A. H. (1927) Description of a new genus and species of Anoplura (Lemurphthirus galagus) from a lemur. Parasitology, 19, 263-264.

Cheng, T. C. (1974) General parasitology. New York: Academic Press.

Fain, A. (1957) Notes sur l'acariase des voies respiratoires chez l'homme et les animaux. Description de deux nouveaux acariens chez un lemurien et des rongeurs. Annales de la Societé Belge de Medicine Tropicale, 37, 469-482.

Fain, A. (1963) Les acariens producteurs de gale chez les lemuriens et les singes avec une etude des Psoroptidae (Sarcoptiformes). Bulletin Institut royal des Sciences naturelles de Belgique, 39, 1-125.

Ferris, G. F. (1954) A new species of Anoplura. Annals of the Natal Museum, 13, 91-94.

Kim, K. C., & Emerson, K. C. (1970) Anoplura from Mozambique with descriptions of a new species and nymphal stages. Revue de Zoologie et Botanique Africaines, 81, 383-416.

Kim, K. C., & Emerson, K. C. (1973) Anoplura of tropical west Africa with descriptions of new species and nymphal stages. Revue de Zoologie et Botanique Africaines, 87, 425-455.

Kohn, D. F., & Haines, D. E. (1982) Diseases of the Prosimii: a review. In D. E. Haines (Ed.), The lesser bushbaby (Galago) as an animal model. Selected topics. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Inc. Pp. 285-301.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Authors' address: Department of Anatomy (L. A. Durden, & A. T. Buck) and Division of Animal Care (D. L. Sly), Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232.

The bushbabies discussed here were purchased for breeding/research purposes by Dr. V. A. Casagrande utilizing funds from NIH grant EYO 1778.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

* * *

Macaca mulatta Available from China for Exchange

About 100 macaques of all ages and both sexes which have been bred at the Kunming Institute, Academia Sinica, China are available. The animals have not been previously used in research. They cannot be sold but may be exported from China in exchange for scientific/technological equipment and/or professional training for Chinese researchers in primatology and reproductive biology and behavior. Contact: Mr. Zhang Hanyun, Vice Director, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Kunming, Yunnan, People's Republic of China. Telephone Kunming 81953.

* * *

Tissues Available

Selected formalin-fixed tissues (especially bone, skeletal muscle and skin) from 15 Macaca mulatta (ages 4, 8, 13, 24, and 31 years) are available for investigative use. Direct inquiries and requests to Dr. C. W. Leathers, Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory, Washington State University, P.O. Box 2037 CS, Pullman WA 99163, (509) 335-9696.

* * *

Editor's Note: The New NIH Animal Care Guidelines

One assessment of the new Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (see July, 1985 issue of this Newsletter, p. 6) by a lobbyist for a medical college association was, "It isn't going to cause a lot of heartburn...The policy does expand the authority of the [institutional animal care and use] committee, but not as..." much as did earlier proposed versions. Considered over-all, one might agree with the statement in Brown University's Office of Research Administration Newsletter that, "The new edition is not radically different from the old one." However, there is no question that one aim of the new guidelines, making the committees more active, will be achieved. Their responsibility and authority is increased and the focus for many of the committees that already exist (probably many people don't realized that institutions having NIH grants have been required to have animal care committees for some time) will have to shift from issues of feeding and space allocation to how animals are used in research.

Since the new policy requires institutional animal care and use committees to review and approve all portions of research proposals involving animals, verification that this procedure has taken place, signed by an individual assigned that function by the institution, must be submitted. The verification may be submitted at the same time as grant applications or contract proposals or 60 days thereafter. If submitted later, the verification letter must state any modifications demanded by the animal care and use committee.

One substantive change from earlier versions is that animal care committees will not have the power to terminate a research grant if members are dissatisfied with the quality of animal care or treatment. A majority of committee members will have the power to suspend research, but it will be up to the president or another high-level institutional officer accountable for animal care to make a final decision. That official, however, would have to report the circumstances to the NIH Office for Protection from Research Risks. In general, the new policy encourages animal care committees to educate researchers and administrators about less painful procedures by forcing them to think about their customary techniques.

The final policy also omits categories of procedures that it originally proposed would require review by all members of the animal research committee. The categories included any procedures that were "harmful or invasive" or involved "prolonged restraining." NIH resolved complaints about the vagueness of these terms by specifying that, although any member of the committee can do a review, every member must be aware of the applications to be reviewed. He or she could then request that the entire committee review a potentially controversial procedure. An institution and its animal care committee are also free to come up with a list of procedures that could be approved by a single committee member or that would require full committee review.

The composition of the committee, as was originally proposed, must have at least five members and include a veterinarian, an animal scientist, a nonscientist, and "one individual not affiliated with the institution." Animal welfare proponents had objected that such a list still didn't require the inclusion of someone with knowledge about animal welfare or ethics. The final policy suggests, but does not mandate, that the nonscientist could be an ethicist, lawyer or member of the clergy.

Each institution can assure NIH that its animal facilities and research procedures are humane either by showing proof of accreditation by the American Association for the Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC) or by providing a report of self-evaluation. Only about 200 of the 840 "research entities" that received NIH grants are currently AAALAC accredited, according to NIH. In one view, the new policy provides institutions an incentive to obtain AAALAC accreditation, which is good for three years, because the self-evaluation route will be more time-consuming and demand considerably more paperwork.

One change that has not received much attention, but which could pose a major problem for some laboratories, is that some cage size recommendations have been changed, with larger enclosures suggested for the larger nonhuman primate species. For example, the minimum space recommendations for cages for Group 3 nonhuman primates (macaques and African species), weighing 3 to 10 kg, is 4.3 cu-ft (.4 cu-m) of floor area per animal, with a cage height of not less than 30 in. (76.2 cm). For Group 4 nonhuman primates (male macaques and large African species) weighing 10 to 15 kg, the numbers are 6cu-ft (.56 cu-m) of floor area per animal and 32 in. (81.28 cm) for height. Thus, the minimum cage sizes now cover a rather wide range of animal weights. Our understanding is that this was done in order to allow inspectors leeway to base their decisions on adequacy of caging on individual laboratory situations. [Some of the information for this note came from an article in the July, 1985 issue of the APA Monitor, p. 5, by S. Cunningham. ]

* * *

Upcoming Primate Meetings

IPS

XIth Congress of the International Primatological Society, July 20-25, 1986 in Göttingen, Federal Republic of Germany. For information contact: IPS Congress Office, Deutsches Primatenzentrum, Kellnerweg 4, D-3400 Göttingen, Federal Republic of Germany.

ASP

The 1986 annual scientific meeting of the American Society of Primatologists will be held in Austin, Texas from June 28th to July 2nd. The meeting will be hosted by Dr. Claude Bramblett and the University of Texas. Further details will be published and the call for papers will be mailed to the membership within the next several months.

The Board of Directors of the ASP has accepted an invitation from Dr. Robert Goy and the University of Wisconsin to host the 1987 annual meeting in Madison, Wisconsin.

* * *

News Briefs

Animal Research Bills Progressing Through Congress

Animal research legislation acceptable to the research community was approved overwhelmingly by both the House and Senate in separate action, and is sure to be included in a House-Senate conference agreement during the period following the summer recess. Identical animal research provisions, contained in the House and Senate versions of the NIH Reauthorization bills require NIH to develop guidelines on the humane care and use of research animals. The measures, introduced by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), also require institutional animal research committees composed of institutional, veterinary, and community members to review research using animals. Guidelines described in the legislation are very similar to NIH rules that will become effective Nov. 1. (See July issue.)

Throughout this year, Congress has been under growing pressure from animal rights activists to pass additional legislation strengthening the existing Animal Welfare Act. Most recently, about 65 demonstrators protesting the use of baboons in federally-funded head trauma research at the University of Pennsylvania conducted a 77-hour sit-in at NIH. Funding for the project was suspended July 18 on the strength of an NIH preliminary, investigative report. But the timing of the suspension, ordered by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services at the height of the NIH protest, led many to conclude that the suspension came solely to placate the animal rights protestors. The effects on animal research legislation of the NIH demonstration and the subsequent suspension of the University of Pennsylvania grant remain unclear. If Congress is still in a mood to consider additional animal research legislation, debate would focus on amendments to the existing Animal Welfare Act. Two identical measures, H.R. 2563 introduced by Rep. George Brown (D-Calif.), and S. 1233, introduced by Senator Robert Dole (R-Kan.), require the Department of Agriculture to develop standards for the humane treatment of animals. The legislation then goes on to specify what those standards must include. One objection to the legislation on the part of most scientific organizations is that researchers would be forced to comply with guidelines from NIH and standards from the Department of Agriculture. [Based on information in the August, 1985, Research Support Network bulletin. ]

University of Pennsylvania Fined

The USDA fined the University of Pennsylvania $4,000 for violations of the Animal Welfare Act following investigations of work being done at the Head Injury Laboratory. The University is appealing the fine.

Grant Funds for City of Hope Suspended

An unannounced site visit by NIH to the City of Hope research facilities in Duarte, CA, resulted in suspension of funding in excess of $5,000,000 as a result of nonconformance with PHS animal welfare policy.

* * *

Addenda to Graduate Programs Directory

If you missed getting a description of your program in the Directory of Graduate Programs in Primatology and Primate Research (1985), published in the July issue, we will publish Addenda to the Directory in the issue following receipt of new information and include it in any future mailings of the Directory. By the way, the Directory is meant for doctoral programs (we forgot to change the title accordingly). We would also be happy to publish descriptions of postdoctoral programs as they are received.

* * *

Recent Books and Articles

Books

Current Primate Researches. M. L. Roonwal, S. M. Mohnot, and N. S. Rathore (Eds.). Jodhpur, India, University of Jodhpur, 1984. 627 pp. [Price: U.S. $30.00. The payment must be made in advance through cheque or draft payable to the International Symposium on Primates, Department of Zoology, University of Jodhpur, Jodhpur 342001, India.]
. . . This book is the result of papers presented at the International Symposium on Primates, held in Jodhpur, February 17-20, 1982. Contents: SECTION I. ECOLOGY AND POPULATION DYNAMICS. 1. Evolution of demographic patterns in the bonnet monkeys (Macaca radiata), by M. Singh, N. Akram, and R. S. Pirta. 2. Adaption of monkeys in the northern latitudes, by V. I. Chernyshev. 3. Population trends of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) in a tropical urban habitat of North India, by A. K. Shukla, P. K. Seth, and S. Seth. 4. Studies on the Hanuman langur, Presbytis entellus, at the Madhav National Park, Shivpuri (Madhya Pradesh, India), by P. L. Kankane. 5. Ecology and conservation of the common langur, Presbytis entellus, in Bangladesh, by M. A. R. Khan. 6. Primates in the Indian Desert (the Hanuman langur, Presbytis entellus, and the rhesus macaque, Macaca mulatta), by R. N. Bhargava. 7. Research potential of Jodhpur langurs (Presbytis entellus), by S. M. Mohnot. 8. Nonhuman primate census surveys in southern India, by G. U. Kurup. 9. Additional information on the status of the lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus) in Karnataka, by H. R. Brat. 10. A population survey of nonhuman primates in some parts of Jammu Province, India, by Y. R. Malhotra, and D. N. Sahi.
. . . SECTION II. MORPHOLOGY, CYTOLOGY, SYSTEMATICS AND EVOLUTION. 11. Long-term metabolic effect of clofibrate (atromid-s) on the testicular function of the normolipaemic langurs (Presbytis entellus (entellus): A histological and biochemical study, by S. K. Bhargava, R. Sinha, and V. P. Dixit. 12. Tail form and carriage in Asian and other primates, and their behavioral and evolutionary significance, by M. L. Roonwal. 13. The present southern limit of the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) in Peninsular India, especially in the Godavari and Krishna river basins, by S. S. Saha. 14. Study of germ-cell morphology and the spermatogenic cycle in the slender loris, Loris tardigradus lydekkerianus (Cabr.), by R. Sarma, and M. Kadam. 15. Banding patterns (GTG, QFM, CBG, and NOR) of the chromosomes of the bonnet monkey (Macaca radiata): Some comparisons with the human karyotype, by D. S. Krishna-Murthy, S. Roy, T. S. Sundereshan, P. M. Contractor, B. R. Srinath, and V. C. Shah. 16. Karyotype of the Hanuman langur, Presbytis entellus entellus, based on measurements and banding pattern: Some comparisons with humans, by D. S. Krishna-Murthy, S. Roy, T. S. Sundereshan, P. M. Contractor, S. Jayaraman, and V. C. Shah. 17. Pattern and frequency of association of nucleolus organiser region (NOR) chromosomes in the Hanuman langur (Presbytis entellus entellus) and the bonnet monkey (Macaca radiata), by D. S. Krishna-Murthy, S. Roy, and V. C. Shah. 18. Field observations on tail carriage in two primates from the Kashmir Valley, India (the langur, Presbytis entellus, and the macaque, Macaca mulatta), by P. C. Tak, and G. Kumar. 19. External morphology of the spinal cord of Macaca mulatta, by C. Rao, and V. Bijlani. 20. Seasonal influences on testicular function in free ranging langurs (Presbytis entellus), by N. K. Lohiya, and R. S. Sharma. 21. Histopathological changes in the testis following bilateral vesectomy in the Hanuman langur, Presbytis entellus, by N. K. Lohiya, S. N. Tiwari, and N. Mathur. 22. Reversible suppression of spermatogenesis with danazol plus testosterone enanthate in the langur, Presbytis entellus entellus, by N. K. Lohiya, O. P. Sharma, and R. C. Sharma. 23. Study on seasonal changes in the circulating levels of testosterone and seminal characteristics of male langurs Presbytis entellus, by N. K. Lohiya, R. S. Sharma, A. Sehgal, J. S. Pruthi, G. F. X. David, and T. C. Kumar. 24. Examination of evolutionary trends of haemoglobins of Old World monkeys, by P. A. Matthew, M. Furtado, S. K. Ahaley, and J. Barnabas. 25. Effect of season on semen quality in bonnet monkeys (Macaca radiata) and baboons, by M. G. Sharma, C. Das, G. P. Talwar. 26. Conservation of genetic material in Papio papio (PPA), Macaca mulatta (MML) and Homo sapiens (HSA), by M. B. Sharma (nee Saxena). 27. Karyotypic evolution in mammals: A new interpretation, by I. P. Singh, and P. K. Ghosh. 28. Growth patterns in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) born in captivity, by D. N. Sharma, S. K. Manchanda, and K. C. Lal. 29. Some nonmetric cranial variants in the Indian rhesus monkey, Macaca mulatta, by A. K. Bhatia.
. . . SECTION III. BEHAVIOUR AND SOCIOBIOLOGY. 30. Behaviour of rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) at Puri (Orissa) during the total solar eclipse of 1980, by R. P. Mukherjee. 31. Validation of dominance measures in free-ranging rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta): A multivariate analysis, by R. Singh, S. N. Sinha, and V. P. Dixit. 32. Cooperative behavior in rhesus monkeys, Macaca mulatta, living in urban and forest areas. I. Genesis, by R. S. Pirta. 33. The role of alliance in the acquisition of intra-family rank in the rhesus macaque, Macaca mulatta, by S. Datta. 34. Play, practice and predictability in nonhuman primates: A study of the langur, Presbytis entellus, by R. A. Curtin. 35. Paternal care and partial breakage of matrilineal organisation in Arashiyama-B troop of Japanese monkeys, Macaca fuscata fuscata, by B. S. Grewal. 36. Organisation and development of play behaviour among rhesus infants (Macaca mulatta), by S. Bhan, R. Singh, and B. S. Gupta. 37. Group characteristics of Macaca mulatta inhabiting submontane and montane forests of the Indian sub-continent: A comparative review, by C. J. Edwin and S. R. K. Chopra. 38. Dynamics of group structure in a family of the common marmoset, Callithrix jacchus (Challitrichidae), by V. Sommer. 39. Some observations on all-male bands of the Hanuman langur, Presbytis entellus, by S. M. Mohnot. 40. Observations on the laboratory feeding of rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta), by X. R. Swamy, and J. E. Brinkert. 41. Pattern of infant transfer within two troops of common langurs (Presbytis entellus) near Jodhpur: Testing hypotheses concerning the benefits and risks, by C. Vogel. 42. Age and grooming in langur male bands (Presbytis entellus), by J. Moore. 43. Diurnal activities of the slender loris, Loris tardigradus, in the Mundanthruai Sanctuary, Tamil Nadu (India), by J. M. Johnson. 44. The function of all-male trouping structure in the Nilgiri langur, Presbytis johnil, by J. M. Johnson. 45. Langur interactions around Jodhpur (Presbytis entellus), by S. M. Mohnot. 46. Behaviour of the hoolock gibbon (Hylobates hoolock) in captivity, by R. Jindal and V. K. Sharma. 47. Recent advances in the field study of male and female ranking order in the Japanese monkey (Macaca fuscata), by Y. Sugiyama. 48. Unusual manipulatory activity and tool-use in a captive crab-eating macaque (Macaca fascicularis), by Y. Artaud, and M. Bertrand. 49. Maternal communication of primiparous and multiparous rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta), by R. K. Singh.
. . . SECTION IV. PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOMEDICINE. 50. Induction of menstrual cyclicity and circulating levels of plasma progesterone and estradaiol in the langurs (Presbytis entellus entellus), by S. R. Chowdhury, and H. Chandra. 51. Changes in levels of proteins in the male reproductive system of the slender loris, Loris tardigradus lydekkerianus (Cabr.), by A. Manjula. 52. Study of reproductive physiology in normal and folate-deficient rhesus monkeys, by D. Mohanty, and K. C. Das. 53. Hypolipidaemic activity of alloin, a glycoside isolated from the leaves of Aloe barbedensis, in normal and hyperlipidaemic rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta), by V. P. Dixit, S. Joshi, R. S. Gupta, and M. Agrawal. 54. Contraceptive properties of cyproterone acetate in male langurs (Presbytis entellus entellus), by V. P. Dixit, and C. L. Gupta. 55. A comparative evaluation of various adjuvants for immunization of rhesus monkeys against malaria, by Q. Z. Hussain, B. Ravindran, S. Biswas, and P. Sethi. 56. The use of rhesus monkeys for studies on vaccination against malaria, by B. Ravindran, and Q. Z. Hussain. 57. Nonhuman primates in research: A five-year study at the Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, by P. Saibaba, and K. R. Bhardwaj. 58. Diurnal and circannual variations of plasma testosterone levels in the male bonnet monkey (Macaca radiata), by K. K. Kamboj, S. S. Chowdhury, V. P. Kamboj, and G. P. Dutta. 59. Microbiological investigation of the rhesus macaque, Macaca mulatta, in an urban setting in Uttar Pradesh, India, by J. P. Tiwari, and A. K. Shukla. 60. Laboratory husbandry and breeding of the langur, Presbytis entellus entellus, by S. Jayarama, X. R. Swamy, and S. R. Munshi. 61. Serum progesterone and total estrogen levels during pregancy in bonnet monkeys (Macaca radiata), by S. Jayaraman, R. Joseph, and U. M. Joshi. 62. Male contraception : Effect of testosoterone and estradiol implants on testicular and accessory reproduction glands function in bonnet monkeys (Macaca radiata), by S. Jayaraman, M. G. Gupta, and A. R. Sheth. 63. Some blood biochemical parameters in the laboratory maintained bonnet and langur monkeys, by S. Jayaraman, K. B. Mehta, S. M. Sant, D. S. Salgaonkar, and S. S. Rao. 64. Observations on the sperm morphology in bonnet monkeys (Macaca radiata), by K. Gopalkrishnan, S. Jayaraman, and A. R. Sheth. 65. Reversible chemical sterilization in male langurs (Presbytis entellus entellus) after administration of danazol: A biochemical and general metabolic approach, by C. L. Gupta. 66. Sex steroid binding plasma proteins of rhesus monkey blood (Macaca mulatta), A. K. Srivastava, G. Chandra, and S. K. Roy. 67. Observations on the fertilizing potential of bonnet monkey (Macaca radiata) spermatozoa, using zona-free hamster eggs. 68. Effect of protein calorie malnutrition and rehabilitation on lipid composition of peripheral nerves in young rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta), by S. V. Rana, C. K. Nain, S. Mehta, J. S. Chopra, and R. N. Chakravarti. 69. Effect of protein calorie malnutrition on enzymes of glycolytic, oxidative and pentose phosphate pathways in young rhesus monkey's brain (Macaca mulatta), by C. K. Nain, S. V. Rana, N. K. Relan, and S. Mehta.
. . . SECTION V. ECONOMIC PRIMATOLOGY AND CONSERVATION. 70. A proposal for conservation of rhesus monkeys in agricultural habitats of northern India, by C. H. Southwick, and M. F. Siddiqi. 71. The husbandry of captive Malaysian nonhuman primates, by M. K. Vidyadaran, A. R. Mutalib, and S. Vellayan. 72. The nematode (Enterobus) infection in Macaca radiata, by M. Anantaraman, P. D. Jagannatha, and K. S. Rao. 73. Louse infestation in Macaca radiata in Tamil Nadu (India), by M. Anantaraman, M. D. Srinivas, and K. Ramalingam. 74. Sedation in Macaca radiata for experimental studies, by P. D. Jagannathan.

Animal Stress. Gary P. Moberg (Ed.). Bethesda, MD: American Physiological Society, 1985. (Distributed for the Society by The Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore.) 324 pp. [Price: $42.50]
. . . This book is the result of an interdisciplinary symposium during July 1983 sponsored by the College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences at the University of California, Davis. The aim of the symposium was to provide a forum for the discussion of problems and methods of studying stress and to suggest possible direction for research that would provide the biological basis for the establishment of meaningful guidelines and legislation for protecting the well-being of animals. Contents: DETERMINING ANIMAL WELL-BEING. 1. What constitutes animal well-being? by S. E. Curtis. 2. Evolutionary and ontogenetic determinants of animal suffering and well-being, by E. O. Price. 3. Biological response to stress: key to assessment of animal well-being?, by G. P. Moberg.
. . . STRESS IN AMINALS. 4. A definition of stress? by S. Levine. 5. Behavioral responses to stress in farm animals, by R. Ewbank. 6. Stress in domestic animals: A psychoneuroendocrine approach, by R. Dantzer and P. Mormede. 7. Spontaneous oscillations in heart rate: Potential index of stress, by S. W. Porges. 8. Assessment of pain in animals, by R. L. Kitchell, and R. D. Johnson. 9. Implantable biotelemetry and social separation in monkeys, by M. Reite.
. . . EFFECTS OF STRESS ON WELL-BEING. 10. Specific effects of stress on disease processes, by J. P. Henry, P. Stephens-Larson. 11. Stress-induced immunomodulation: What is it, if it is? by M. S. Golub, M. Eric Gershwin. 12. Immunological consequences of changing environmental stimuli, by K. W. Kelley. 13. Cortisol as mediator of stress-associated immunosuppression in cattle, by J. A. Roth. 14. Influence of stress on reproduction: Measure of well-being, by G. P. Moberg. 15. Influence of stress on protein metabolism, by K. C. Klasing.
. . . WELL-BEING OF LABORATORY ANIMALS. 16. Regulations and guidelines for animal care: Problems and future concerns, by G. W. Irving III. 17. Definition of laboratory animal environmental conditions, by E. L. Besch.

The Natural History of the Primates. J. R. Napier and P. H. Napier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1985. 200 pp. [Price: $19.95].
. . . An introduction to the order, Primates. The book describes its general characteristics and distribution, reviews the fossil record on primate origins, and describes anatomical details and social behavior. The book includes specific profiles of the individual primate species. A final chapter focuses on Homo sapiens and percursors. Contents: 1. What are primates? 2. Primate origins. 3. Structure and function. 4. Social behaviour. 5. Profiles of primates. 6. Human evolution.

Primates in Nature. Alison F. Richard. New York: Freeman, 1985. 558 pp. [Price: $27.95]
. . . An introduction to the ecology of primates. Contents: Ch. 1. Studying primates. 1.1 Introduction. 1.2 The primates: A historical perspective. 1.3 Notes on the history of ecology as a discipline. 1.4 The Primate pattern. 1.5 Overview.
. . . PART I. PRIMATES AT LARGE. Ch. 2. Primate distribution: past and present. 2.1 Biomes of the world. 2.2 Distribution of primates among biomes today. 2.3 Past distribution of primates among biomes. 2.4 Discussion. Ch. 3. Primate distribution: A broader perspective. 3.1 Distribution of mammals. 3.2 Stresses at high latitudes. 3.3 Mammals at high latitudes. 3.4 The case of the langurs and macaques. 3.5 Discussion.
. . . PART II. PRIMATES AS INDIVIDUALS. Ch. 4. Food. 4.1 Constituents of food. 4.2 How food items vary. 4.3 Nutrients: How much is enough? 4.4 Food, survival, and reproduction. 4.5 Summary. Ch. 5. Primate diets: Patterns and principles. 5.1 Introduction. 5.2 Dietary patterns. 5.3 Importance of size in understanding dietary variation. 5.4 Specializations related to harvesting and processing Food. 5.5 Theory of optimal diet. Ch. 6. Reproduction. 6.1 Female reproductive cycle. 6.2 Case studies. 6.3 Commentary.
. . . PART III. PRIMATES IN POPULATIONS. Ch. 7. Demography. 7.1 Introduction. 7.2 Concepts, methods, and oroblems. 7.3 Case studies. 7.4 Environmental influences on fertility and mortality. 7.5 Evolution of life history traits.
. . . PART IV. PRIMATES IN SOCIAL GROUPS. Ch. 8. Diversity of primate social organization. 8.1 A plethora of terms. 8.2 Case studies of primate social organization. 8.3 Putting primates in their social place. Ch. 9. Determinants of social organization. 9.1 Introduction. 9.2 Ecology and primate social organization. 9.3 Problems old and new. 9.4 New directions.
. . . PART V. PRIMATES IN COMMUNITIES. Ch. 10. Sympatry, competition, and the niche. 10.1 Introduction. 10.2 Framework of research 10.3 Case studies. 10.4 Discussion. Ch. 11. Of bats, birds, and baobabs. 11.1 Introduction. 11.2 Primates and community structure and function. 11.3 Relationships between primates and other herbivores. 11.4 Primates and plants. 11.5 Primate coevolutionary relationships.

Bibliographies

The Aged Nonhuman Primates (Biology): A Bibliography 1976-1985. Seattle: Primate Information Center, 1985. [Price: $7.50 ($6.50 prepaid). Send order to Primate Information Center, Regional Primate Research Center, SJ-50, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195.]

Pan paniscus (Bonobo learning, behavior, ecology and conservation: A bibliography. Seattle: Primate Information Center, 1985. [Price: $6.50 ($5.50 prepaid). Ordering information same as above.]

Prenatal brain development in nonhuman primates: A bibliography, 1970-1985. Williams, J. B. Seattle: Primate Information Center, 1985. 15 pp. [Price: $7.00 ($6.00 prepaid). Ordering information same as above.]

Directories, Magazines, Reports

REP: ANNUAL REPORT 1984. Rijswick, The Netherlands: Organization for Health Research TNO, 1985.
. . . This is the annual report of the REP-Institutes, which stands for the Radiobiological Institute TNO, Institute for Experimental Gerontology TNO, and Primate Center TNO, Rijswick Z.H., The Netherlands. Of the many short notes describing the accomplishments of the organization, the following are concerned with primates: TUMOUR INDUCTION AND TUMOUR BIOLOGY. Toxicity of 3,4,3'4'-tetrachlorbiphenly in marmosets, by K. J. van den Berg, C. Zurcher, and A. Brouwer. IMMUNOLOGY AND TRANSPLANTATION BIOLOGY. The phylogeny of T-cell antigens in primates, by M. Jonker, and F. J. M. Nooij. Characterization of FN18, a monoclonal antibody specific for rhesus monkey T-cells, by F. J. M. Nooij, and A. F. Kok. Prevention of graft-versus-host disease by anti-T-cell monoclonal antibodies in rhesus monkeys, by W. R. Gerritsen, G. M. van Meurs, M. Jonker, and G. Wagemaker. ETHOLOGY. A comparative approach to the question of why human infants develop so slowly, by H. Dienske.

Biomedical Research Technology Resources: A Research Resources Directory (6th Revised Ed.). Bethesda, MD: Division of Research Resources, National Institutes of Health, 1984. (NIH Publication No. 85-1430.)
. . . Provides information on the resources of the Biomedical Research Technology Program. The Program concentrates on the application of the physical sciences, mathematics, and engineering to biology and medicine. Ultrasophisticated instruments, the latest state-of-the-art methods, and expert support personnel provided by the program help life scientists to decipher fundamental biological processes of the human body. The program's capabilities include large scale and minicomputer systems; biochemical and biophysical instruments (mass spectrometers, nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometers, electron spin resonance spectromenters); million-volt electron microscopes; lasers; flow cytometers; vibrating probes, biomedical engineering technologies; and production of biochemical research materials. The complex computer systems are used primarily for statistical data reduction, mathematical analyses, biomedical modeling, and organized knowledge systems. Other computers are used for specialized operations such as monitoring vital signs in critically ill patients. The biomedical and biophysical instruments facilitate research on biological structure and function at the molecular level. The biomedical materials resources produce labeled chemical compounds for use in research. The Biomedical Research Technology Program works with biomedical scientists toward the development of new research technologies or new applications of existing technologies. In addition, the program provides training for the research community in the use of all biomedical technology tools and procedures. Refer all inquries on this publication to: Research Resources Information Center, 1601 Research Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20850 (301-984-2870), or Office of Sciences and Health Reports, Division of Research Resources, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20205 (301-496-5545).

Primate Eye, No. 25, February 1985. (Primate Society of Great Britain).
. . . The issue includes: Abstracts from the Winter Scientific Meeting 1984; Reports from Corresponding Members of the Conservation Working Party (Tucurui: A summary. Status of primates in Para State, Brazil. A programme of research and training in rainforest ecology in the Danum Valley, Sabah); Report on primate rehabilitation Symposium.

Primate Eye, No. 26, June 1985. [Price: 43.]
. . . The issue includes: Abstracts from the Spring Scientific Meeting; Notes from the Conservation Working Party (Chimpanzees on Spanish beaches. First field observations of Pithecia albicans.).

Primate Eye, No. 26 (Suppl.): 1-11, 1985. (Primate Society of Great Britain)
. . . Summary of current primate field studies. (Order from: Ann Maclarnon, Treasurer, PSGB, Dept. of Anthropology, University College, London, Gower Street, London, WC1E, 6BT, United Kingdom.)

Primate Report, No. 12, January 1985. (Published in cooperation with the German Primate Center (DPZ).)
. . . The issue includes the following articles: Urinating onto hand ("urine washing") in the moustached tamarin, Saguinus m. mystax (primates: callitrichidae), by E. W. Heymann, W. Kaumanns, & L. A. Sicchar; Statistical detection of determination structures in group processes of hamadryas baboons (Papio hamadryas), by M. H. Schwibbe, & W. Kaumanns; A female "defeated leader" in hamadryas baboons: A case study, by G. Pfeiffer, W. Kaumanns, & M. H. Schwibbe.

Primate Report, No. 13, August, 1985. (Published in cooperation with the German Primate Center (DPZ).)
. . . The issue includes the following articles: Postnatal growth of Macaca Fascicularis born in captivity, by A. Spiegel; Caesarean delivery and handrearing of Saguinus leucopus triplets in the laboratory -- A case report, by M. C. Alveario, A. Belcher, C. Caldwell, R. T. Henry, & G. Epple; Mite infestation of Tupaia glis Diard, 1820, by K. Bever.

Disease

Abnormal findings in the ocular fundi of colony-born cynomolgus monkeys. Suzuki, M. T., Narita, H., Cho, F., Fukui, M., & Honjo, S. (The Corporation for Production and Research of Laboratory Primates, The National Insitute of Health, Hachimandai, Yatabe-machi, Tsukuba-gun, Ibaraki-ken, 305 Japan.) Experimental Animals, 1985, 34, 131-140.
. . . The ocular fundi of 1,151 apparently healthy colony-born cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) ranging in age from newborn to 19 years were examined using an ophthalmoscope. 238 abnormal findings were recorded in 219 of the 1,151 monkeys. Of these, 23 were related to the optic disc and 115 to the retinal vessels. Of the remaining 100 abnormal findings, 91 were retinal degenerations and 9 were retinal hemorrhages. The 23 optic disc abnormalities consisted of 3 cases of micropapilla, 4 of ectasia and 16 of myelination of the retinal nerve fibers. Of the 115 retinal vascular abnormalities, 87 were arterial tortuosity, one was venous tortuosity, 2 were tortuosity of both artery and vein, 2 were artery-vein crossing, 20 were copper-wire artery, one was inosculation of the artery, one was vascularization of the vein and one was persistent hyaloid artery. Of the 91 retinal degenerations, one was degeneration of the periphery of the macular and the optic disc, 8 were macular degeneration and 82 were peripheral degeneration. Nine cases of retinal hemorrhages appeared under 6 years of age.

Animal Welfare

Animal pain. Wright, E. M., Jr., Marcella, K. L., & Woodson, J. F. (Dept. of Comparative Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22908). Lab Animal, 1985, 14[4], 20-36.
. . . This article deals with definition of pain, its recognition and control. It includes a discussion of various analgesics.

Physiology and Behavior

The relationship between frugivory and insectivory in primates. Redford, K. H., Bouchardet da Fonseca, G. A., & Lacher, T. E., Jr. (Florida State Museum, Museum Road, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.) Primates, 1984, 25, 433-440.
. . . Fruit and insects are two of the major components of primate diets. Previous investigators have often assumed that the consumption of fruit by primates was unassociated with the consumption of insects. The authors contend that much of what has been termed fruit-eating by primates involves a significant and deliberate ingestion of insects. The implications of this are discussed.

Measurement of serum prolactin and the effect of ketamine anesthesia on serum prolactin levels in cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Yoshida, T., Kono, M., Yokota, K., Cho, F., & Honjo, S. (Tsukuba Primate Center for Medical Science, The National Institute of Health, Hachimanda, Yatabe-machi, Tsukuba-gun Ibaragi-ken 305, Japan.) Experimental Animals, 1985, 34, 165-171. [In Japanese with an English abstract.]
. . . The effect of an anesthetic, ketamine, on serum prolactin level was examined in wild-originating female cynomolgus monkeys. Serum prolactin levels were measured by the homologous radioimmunoasay system which was developed for human prolactin. The validity was confirmed by using an extract of pituitary gland from a female cynomolgus monkey as well as serum and amniotic fluid from a pregnant monkey. Additionally, serum luteinizing hormone (LH) levels were determined by the radioreceptorassay system developed in our laboratory using Leydig cells collected from rats' testes as a receptor fraction. The experiment was repeated three times at one-month intervals, using three groups consisting of 5, 7, and 8 monkeys each. In the first experiment, the first group was injected with physiological saline and the second and third groups were intramuscularily given ketamine at a dose level of 5 mg/kg B.W. and 15 mg/kg B.W., respectively. In the second experiment, the first and second groups were given ketamine at a dose of 5 mg/kg B.W. and of 15 mg/kg B.W., respectively, and the third group served as control injected with saline. In the third experiment, the first and third groups were administered with 15 mg/kg and 5 mg/kg of ketamine and the second group was injected with saline. In short, all of the twenty monkeys received the three different treatments for two months. The serum prolactin level showed a marked increase after the administration of ketamine. However, this increase was observed only in half of the monkeys and no change was observed in the remaining half. In contrast with the prolactin level, no effect was produced on the LH level by the administration of ketamine in all the animals used. The effect of ketamine on prolactin secretion from the pituitary gland in cynomolgus monkeys varied with every individual. That is, the secretion of prolactin was significantly stimulated in some animals and was not in some others. The reason for this difference among individuals is not clear as yet. However, the present study suggests that such an individual difference may explain discrepancies among the results of previous reports.

Breeding and Rearing

Resumption of seasonal breeding patterns in male and female rhesus monkeys transferred from an indoor to an outdoor environment. Herndon, J. G., Ruiz de Elvira, M-C., Turner, J. J., & Collins, D. C. (Div. of Neurobiology, Yerkes Regional Primate Research Center, Biology of Reproduction, 1985, 32, 733-744.
. . . Seasonal aspects of social behavior and sex steriod levels were observed in two groups of rhesus monkeys from March through December. One group (3 males, 7 females) had lived outdoors for several years. The other group (6 males, 5 females), transferred outdoors in late February, had lived indoors for several years. In March-April, the long-term outdoor residents displayed the expected seasonal pattern of sexual behavior, characterized by absence of complete sequences of copulatory behavior. At this time the indoor-adapted group displayed high levels of copulatory behavior. Thereafter, frequencies of sexual behavior of the two groups were similar. Testosterone in the males was positively correlated with frequency of sexual behavior in each group. Females in the indoor-adapted group displaced menstrual cycles in March and April and 3 of 5 became pregnant at this time. The two remaining indoor-adapted females continued to display ovulatory cycles, but little sexual behavior, throughout the summer. Interestingly, two females in the outdoor-adapted group also displayed summer ovulatory cycles, without concomitant sexual activity. These data show that the disruption of seasonal breeding patterns produced by lengthy indoor housing remains briefly apparent following transfer outdoors, but is substantially overcome within a few months.

Evaluation of the subhuman primate pregnancy test kit for the detection of early pregnancy in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta). Naqvi, R. H., & Lindberg. M. C. (EG & G Mason Research Institute, 57 Union St., Worcester, MA 01608.) Journal of Medical Primatology, 1985, 14, 229-233.
. . . The performance of The Subhuman Primate Pregnancy Test Kit was evaluated for routine detection of early (days 19-21) pregnancy in the rhesus monkey. Out of 123 confirmed matings, 19 resulted in pregnancy. In the pregnant animals the kit had an accuracy of 73.7%. In the nonpregnant females the accuracy was higher, 88.5%. False positives were encountered in ovariectomized females as well as adult intact males.

Three successful cases of artificial insemination in chimpanzees. Matsubayashi, K., Kumazaki, K., & Kamanaka, Y. (Primate Research Institute of Kyoto University, Kanrin, Inuyama, Aichi 484, Japan.) Experimental Animals, 1985, 34, 203-206. [In Japanese with an English abstract.]
. . . Artificial inseminations were performed on two female chimpanzees from July 1981 to April 1983 and three conceptions were obtained. Semen samples collected by rectal probe method of electroejaculation were incubated at 37deg C for about 20 minutes for liquefaction. Liquefied portion of the semen was sucked up into a polyethylene tube about 30cm in length attached to a syringe and was inseminated into the cervix of each female, the pelvic region of which was raised in prone position under anesthesia. Ovulation time was estimated by swelling of sex skin in earlier two cases and by urinary LH level in last case. Three offspring were born 234, 235, and 235 days after last insemination, respectively. All three show normal development.

The roles of early separation experience and prior familiarity in the social relations of pigtail macaques: A descriptive multivariate study. Capitanio, J. P., & Reite, M. Primates, 1984, 25, 475-484.
. . . Research has suggested that a social separation during a macaque's infancy may result in later deficiencies in maternal behavior, as well as in reduced sociability. The present study examined whether monkeys now living in an all-peer group who had experienced a maternal separation 1.5 to 3 years prior to the time of these observations, displayed persisting social deficits. Using multivariate techniques, prior separation history and several demographic variables were examined as to their role in explaining the observed variation in measures of social behaior and preference. The results indicated that, as compared to nonseparated controls, previously separated monkeys played less, displayed social preferences to fewer individuals, displayed fewer contact preferences, and showed reciprocated preferences to fewer individuals. In addition, several gender and rank-related effects were found. In terms of the identities of the preferred partners, individuals preferred animals from the same natal group. The results support the notion that an early separation experience can result in long-term social impairment, although the effects appear to be subtle.

Plasma estradiol and progesterone levels during postpartum ovulation and early pregnancy in the common marmoset Callithrix jacchus. Kholkute, S. D. (Institute for Research in Reproduction (ICMR), Jehangir Merwanji Street, Parel, Bombay 400 012, India.) Primates, 1984, 25, 538-543.
. . . By two weeks following delivery, all the animals (N = 10) had ovulated as determined by a gradual rise in plasma estradiol followed by a rise in plasma progesterone ( p > 31.8 nmol/l) levels. The mean day of ovulation was 11.3 +/- 1.5. 80% of these animals became pregnant as indicated by a continued rise in plasma progesterone levels (p > 127 nmol/l) and as confirmed by transabdominal uterine palpation. These results suggest that the day of delivery could serve as a useful parameter to monitor ovulation and pregnancy in this non-menustrating primate species.

Birth spacing in langur monkeys (Presbytis entellus). Harley, D. (Dept. of Anthropology, Mills College, Oakland, CA 94613.) International Journal of Primatology, 1985, 6, 227-242.
. . . This paper presents 10 years of reproductive data on birth interval length and 5 years of data on reproductive behavior postpartum from a captive colony of gray langur monkeys housed in Berkeley, California. Birth intervals of females following different pregnancy and nursing schedules are compared. Females whose infants survive to the age of 9 months have a median birth interval of 15.4 months. Females experiencing a pregnancy failure or the loss of a neonate had median birth intervals of 9.6 and 10.7 months, respectively. The data indicate that the loss of an infant after the age of 5 to 6 months will not accelerate a female's ability to conceive or shorten the birth interval length. The available data on birth spacing from populations of free-ranging langurs are reviewed.

Effects of social rearing conditions and partus experience on periparturitional behaviour in java-macaques (macaca fascicularis). Kemps, A., & Timmermans, P. (Dept. of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands). Behaviour, 1984, 88, 200-214.
. . . This study investigated the effects of social rearing conditions and partus experience on maternal behaviour directly preceding, during, and directly following birth. There were two rearing conditions: within the birth-group which included the mother and other non-peers and in a peer group. There were two groups with respect to partus experience: primiparae, whose first partus we observed, and pluriparae, of which a later partus was studied. It appeared that the behaviour of the mothers directly before the partus was not affected by the selected variables. The mothers' behaviour was not influenced by earlier rearing either during or closely after the partus, but it was affected by partus experience. Pluriparae proved more capable than primiparae in handling child and placenta.
. . . The effects of partus experience can be explained in terms of state dependent novelty. Learning in the mother is effected via her own child.

Facilities and Care

Guidelines for specification of animals and husbandry methods when reporting the result of animal experiments. Ellery, D. A. (c/o Solco Basle Ltd., Rührbergstrasse 21, CH-4127 Birsfelden, Switzerland.) Laboratory Animals, 1985, 19, 106-108.
. . . Any report on the results of animal studies must include sufficient information on the animals used and their conditions of husbandry to enable the reader to understand how the investigation was performed. Only then can he properly interpret the findings. These guide-lines provide a catalogue of the minimum information which should be included in such reports.

Conservation

The rehabilitated chimpanzees of Rubondo Island. Borner, M. (Frankfurt Zoological Society, Tanzania Wildlife Conservation Project, P.O. Box 154, Mwanza, Tanzania.) Oryx, 1985, 19, 151-154.
. . . Between 1966 and 1969, 17 chimpanzees, which had all been captured in the wild and had spent various amounts of time in European zoos, were released in Rubondo Island National Park in Lake Victoria, Tanzania. Now there is a healthy population of at least 20 chimpanzees, and it is likely that there is now a second generation of Rubondo-born animals. Although the Rubondo experiment has been a success, in general chimpanzee rehabilitation seems to have a very uncertain future, mainly because suitable habitats without a wild population are difficult to find.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

In many cases, the original source of references in this section has been the Current Primate References prepared by The Primate Information Center, Regional Primate Research Center SJ-50, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. Because of this excellent source of references, the present section is devoted primarily to presentation of abstracts of articles of practical or of general interest. In most cases, abstracts are those of the authors.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

* * *

Pre-Doctoral Fellowship Available

The Primate Foundation of Arizona, in association with Arizona State University, has available predoctoral fellowships for the study of chimpanzee behavior. Two annual fellowships are offered for 12 months; non-taxable award amount is $9,000. Deadlines for application submittal are: 30 September for 12-month period beginning 1 January and 31 March for 12-month period beginning 1 July. The Foundation's general aim with the awarding of this Fellowship is to encourage all forms of scientific inquiry into the behaviors of captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). The Fellowship is meant for the training and support of pre-doctoral students working in disciplines relevant to the aims and policies of the Foundation. All work is done on-site at the Foundation. The Foundation is primarily interested in studies of the reproductive and mothering behaviors of captive-born chimpanzees and studies germane to the Foundation's long-term goals of improving the quality of life and reproductive potential for all captive chimpanzees. There are approximately 50 chimpanzees in the colony; ranging in ages from 1 month to 28 years. For the most part, this number will remain stable, however, some animals do temporarily cycle in and out of the colony. Infants remain with their mothers for periods up to 18 months or longer. Send letter of inquiry to: Ms. Jo Fritz, Administrative Director, Primate Foundation of Arizona, P.O. Box 86, Tempe, AZ 85281 (Phone: 602-832-3780).

* * *