The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™

ISSN 2307-8235 (online)

IUCN 2019: T2993A17927228
Scope: Global
Language: English

Brachyteles arachnoides, Southern Muriqui

Assessment by: Talebi, M., Melo, F., Rylands, A.B., Ferraz, D. da S., Ingberman,
B., Mittermeier, R.A., Martins, M. & Jerusalinsky, L.

View on www.iucnredlist.org

Citation: Talebi, M., Melo, F., Rylands, A.B., Ferraz, D. da S., Ingberman, B., Mittermeier, R.A.,
Martins, M. & Jerusalinsky, L. 2019. Brachyteles arachnoides. The IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species 2019: e.T2993A17927228. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-
2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en

Copyright: © 2019 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written
permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged.

Reproduction of this publication for resale, reposting or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written
permission from the copyright holder. For further details see Terms of Use.

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species Programme, the IUCN
Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership. The IUCN Red List Partners are: Arizona State
University; BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens Conservation International; Conservation International; NatureServe;
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew; Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; and Zoological Society of London.

If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown in this document, please provide us with
feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided.

THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™

Taxonomy
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family

Animalia Chordata Mammalia Primates Atelidae

Taxon Name:  Brachyteles arachnoides (É. Geoffroy, 1806)

Common Name(s):
• English: Southern Muriqui, Muriqui, Woolly Spider Monkey
• French: Atèle Arachnoïde, Eroïde, Singe-araignée Laineux
• Spanish: Mono Carvoeiro, Mono Grande, Muriki
Taxonomic Notes:
Vieira (1944) recognized two subspecies of Brachyteles. Recent evidence provided by Lemos de Sá et al.
(1990), Fonseca et al. (1991) and Lemos de Sá and Glander (1993) indicated that Vieira’s original (1944)
standing was valid, but that differentiation is even more extreme and justifies the classification of the
two forms as separate species (see also Coimbra-Filho et al. 1993). Groves (2001, 2005) lists the two
muriquis as separate species.

Assessment Information
Red List Category & Criteria: Critically Endangered A2cd ver 3.1

Year Published: 2019

Date Assessed: March 18, 2019

Justification:
Brachyteles arachnoides is listed CR based on an inferred or suspected population reduction of at least
80% over the past 60 years (three generations), corresponding to a decline in area of occupancy (AOO)
estimated at more than 80%. Population reduction due to habitat loss has been exacerbated by hunting,
which has resulted in the extirpation of small- to medium-sized sub-populations and continues to be a
significant threat, even in protected areas.

Previously Published Red List Assessments

2008 – Endangered (EN)
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2008.RLTS.T2993A9529160.en

2003 – Endangered (EN)

2000 – Critically Endangered (CR)

1996 – Endangered (EN)

1994 – Endangered (E)

1990 – Endangered (E)

1988 – Endangered (E)

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 1
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
1986 – Endangered (E)

1982 – Endangered (E)

Geographic Range
Range Description:
The geographic distribution of Brachyteles arachnoides ranges from the northeast region of Paraná
along the central and eastern region of São Paulo State and the southern region of Rio de Janeiro (Talebi
et al. 2011). To the north it occurs as far as the southern margin of the Paraíba do Sul River and to the
west of this river, it could have reached the south-eastern parts of Minas Gerais on the southern slopes
of the Serra da Mantiqueira. One population still exists in the delta of the Piracicaba and Tiete Rivers.

Its stronghold today is in the southern region of Sâo Paulo State, in the montane forests of the Serra de
Paranapiacaba (Talebi 2005, Talebi and Soares 2005). Based on Koehler et al. (2005) the species’ range in
Paraná State is restricted to the south by the Ribeira de Iguape River and to the west by the Campo
Biome. Within this range, there are only two populations remaining, one at Castro Municipality and
another in Doutor Ulysses Municipality. Throughout the region, the only remnant forest of any
considerable size is that of the Lauráceas State Park (23,000 ha), in a montane region of the
Municipalities of Adrianópolis and Tunas do Paraná (Ingberman 2015). In São Paulo State, there are
three main strongholds for the species. These are the Serra de Paranapiacaba, in the dense montane
forests of the Municipalities of São Miguel Arcanjo and Capão Bonito, the Carlos Botelho State Park
(24°15-44’S, 47°46-48°10´W), and the Fundação Florestal do Estado de São Paulo. Additional field sites
protecting known subpopulations in the region include a protected private reserve, i.e., the Muriqui
Ecopark (Pró-Muriqui Association), and two corporate private business areas, i.e., Fazenda São Miguel
Klabin and Legado das Águas Reserve Votorantim. These areas represent the core areas of the World
Heritage Site Atlantic Forest South-East Reserves (decreed in 1999 and considered of outstanding
universal value in 2015).

For the Serra do Mar region containing the largest protected area of São Paulo, the Parque Estadual
Serra do Mar is supposed to protect the species. Although several areas have been proven to have
experienced local extinctions, the exact distributional status of the species in the region is unknown, but
is certainly declining. In the Serra da Mantiqueira, bordering the States of Minas Gerais and São Paulo, a
few remnants of forest still remain and only two localities, the São Sebastião Fibria Farm (22°45´S
45°28´W) and the region of São Francisco Xavier (23°12’S 45°52’W) are confirmed as current areas in
which the species survives. In addition, the last remnant of interior deciduous forest, the Barreiro Rico
Farm, contains a vanishing population in the municipality of Anhembi, located in the deltas of the Tiete
and Piracicaba Rivers (Talebi and Soares 2005, Talebi et al. 2011, Talebi et al. 2016). In Rio de Janeiro
State, the Itatiaia National Park, the Serra dos Orgãos National Park and the Bocaina National Park are
the only known localities to host confirmed extant populations.

Country Occurrence:
Native: Brazil (Paraná, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo)

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 2
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
Distribution Map
Brachyteles arachnoides

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 3
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
Population
Brachyteles arachnoides is now known to survive in 20 localities: 12 in São Paulo State, two in Parana
State, and six in Rio de Janeiro State. The estimated total population is 1,100-1,200 individuals,
inhabiting a combination of national, state, municipal and private protected areas, as well as
unprotected forests (Talebi and Soares 2016, Strier et al. 2017). The largest subpopulations are those of
Carlos Botelho State Park, Serra dos Orgaos National Park, Serra do Mar State Park and the Legado Das
Aguas Votorantim Reserve. Several of the subpopulations in São Paulo State exist in small, isolated
forest patches and their long-term viability is questionable, while the sub-populations of Tres Picos,
Desengano State Park, Cunhambebe State and Serra da Bocaina National Park may actually be larger
than previously estimated (Strier et al. 2017). However, a significant number of subpopulations
identified by Aguirre (1971) have apparently been extirpated.
Current Population Trend:  Decreasing

Habitat and Ecology (see Appendix for additional information)

The species inhabits submontane and montane evergreen tropical forest of the Atlantic coast of Brazil.
According to Aguirre (1971), Brachyteles arachnoides is found in montane forests between 400-1,880
meters asl, in well-preserved remnants of seasonal and evergreen forests. Recent data indicate the
resilience of the taxon in subtropical/tropical montane and deciduous evergreen forests, between 400-
1,880 m asl (Talebi in prep). Studies on dietary requirements and feeding ecology were conducted in the
Fazenda Barreiro Rico by Milton (1984) and Martins (2003a,b, 2005b, 2006), in the Intervales State Park
(Petroni 1993, 2000) and in the Carlos Botelho State Park (Moraes 1992a,b; Lucas et al. 2012, 2016;
Ganzhorn et al. 2009; Talebi 2005; Talebi et al. 2005, 2016; Talebi 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014).

Size:
Adult male size: 1.57 m crown rump size (Talebi et al. 2016)
Adult female size: 1.44 m crown rump size (Talebi et al. 2016)
Adult male weight: 9.1 kg (n=7) (Talebi and Lee 2010)
Adult female weight: 8.3 kg (n=4) (Talebi and Lee 2010)

Systems:  Terrestrial

Threats (see Appendix for additional information)

Historically, forest loss and hunting have been the two most significant threats to Brachyteles
arachnoides.

Estimates of the original distribution of the genus Brachyteles are based in large part on the studies of
Aguirre (1971), undertaken nearly 50 years ago. Recent Spatial Distribution Modelling (SDM) estimates
the species’ original area of occupancy (AOO) at 345,760 km², within which only 20,611 km² of suitable
habitat remains, representing what must be regarded as an irreversible loss of 96% (Ingberman et al.
2016). Deforestation has occurred largely due to an expanding agricultural frontier, cattle ranching,
urbanization and development.

The current population of the Southern Muriqui is believed to be less than 1,200 individuals surviving in
20 isolated, subpopulations in a mixture of private, municipal, state and national protected areas in the

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 4
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
states of Rio de Janeiro (6), Sao Paulo (12) and Parana (2) (Strier et al. 2017). Of the subpopulations,
one (Carlos Botelho State Park) is believed to contain between 100 and 250 mature individuals, while
three (Serra dos Orgaos National Park, Serra do Mar State Park and the Legado Das Aguas Votorantim
Reserve) are believed to contain between 50 and 100 mature individuals (Strier et al 2017).

Hunting has been severe in past decades and continues to be a significant threat, even within officially
protected areas. Since the first regional survey of the two Brachyteles species was conducted nearly 60
years ago, the extirpation of at least a dozen former populations of the Southern Muriqui is believed to
have occurred (Aguirre 1971, Rylands et al. 1998, Melo et al. 2005, Nogueira et al. 2009, M. Talebi, pers.
comm).

Conservation Actions (see Appendix for additional information)

This species is recorded from the following protected areas:

• São Paulo State Carlos Botelho State Park, (37,432 ha) (Pacaganella 1991; Mittermeier et al. 1987;
Talebi and Soares 2005; Talebi 2005, 2010; Talebi et al. 2011; Talebi 2016)
• Muriqui Ecopark (RPPN Pro-Muriqui Association), (250 ha) (Talebi et al. 2011, Talebi 2016)
• Xitué Ecological Station, (3,095 ha) (Gonzalez-Solis et al. 2001)
• Intervales State Park, (45,000 ha) (Petroni 2000)
• Serra do Mar State Park, (315,391 ha) (Mittermeier et al. 1987, Talebi and Soares 2005)
• Neblinas Park (RPPN Ecofuturo), (2,100 ha) (Talebi and Soares 2005)
• São Francisco Xavier Environmental Protection Area (APA), (2,500 ha) (Antonietto and Silva 1994, Silva
1999, Talebi and Soares 2005)
• São Sebastião Farm, Pindamonhangaba, SP - Fibria (1,206 ha) (Oliveira and Manzatti 1996, Talebi and
Soares 2005, Talebi and Soares 2016)
• São Miguel Farm, São Miguel Arcanjo-SP, Klabin (Talebi and Soares 2016)
• Legado das Aguas Reserve (Talebi and Soares 2016)

• Juréia - Itatins Ecological Station, (79,240 ha) (Talebi and Soares 2005)
• Serra da Bocaina National Park, São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro States (104,000 ha) (Aguirre 1971)
• Rio de Janeiro StateSerra dos Órgãos National Park, Rio de Janeiro (11,800 ha) (Breves et al. 2013)
• Desengano State Park, Rio de Janeiro (22,400 ha) (Garcia 2005; currently unconfirmed)
• Paraiso Ecological Station, Rio de Janeiro (5,000 ha) (Garcia 2005; currently unconfirmed)
• Cairuçú Environmetal Protection Area (APA), Rio de Janeiro (33,800 ha) (Vaz 1998, Garcia 2005;
currently unconfirmed)

• Três Picos State Park / Guapiaçu Ecological Station, Rio de Janeiro (46,350 ha) (Talebi et al. 2011;
currently unconfirmed)

Conservation research:
The only long-term systematic research site for the Southern Muriquis occurs within the Carlos Botelho
State Park founded in 1986. In 2000 the NGO Associação Pró-Muriqui was set up (PHVA Muriqui 1998)
to ensure continued research activities in the park and elsewhere in São Paulo (Talebi and Soares 2005).
At the present this long term research project monitors the populations of Carlos Botelho State Park,
Legado das Águas, Sao Sebastiao Farm, São Miguel Farm and will soon start in Barreiro Rico. These and
other science based conservation actions follow the guidelines of public conservation policies, the

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 5
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
federal conservation policy, the National Action Plan Muriqui, the São Paulo State Conservation Public
Policy, the Primate State Conservation Plan, and the directives published by the Pró-Primatas Comission
(São Paulo State 2015).

Conservation policy:
A Population and Habitat Viability Analysis (PHVA) was carried out for both species of Brachyteles in
1998 (Rylands et al. 1998), which sparked a series of surveys in Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro, Espírito
Santo, Bahia and in São Paulo State. It further led to the foundation of the Associação Pró-Muriqui, a
NGO coordinating research within São Paulo State. In 2002, the Brazilian Institute for the Environment
(IBAMA) set up the Committee for the Conservation and Management of the Muriqui (Oliveira et al.
2005). In 2011 the Instituto Chico Mendes da Conservação da Biodiversidade (ICMBIO) published The
National Action Plan Muriqui. In 2015, São Paulo State launched the Pró-Primatas Comission, a
permanent commission responsible for elaborating conservation policies for state-wide action on
threatened primate species.

Ex situ conservation:
Captive breeding has been problematic due to low levels of reproduction and poor infant survival. There
is a small, but promising, captive breeding programme for the species in Sorocaba Zoo, which has been
successful on maintaining the species. There also exists the continued ex situ program for the species at
Rio de Janeiro Primate Center (Coimbra- Filho et al. 1993, Pissinatti et al. 1998, Pissinatti 2005) but none
of these institutions has been successful in regularly generating or maintaining offspring. The National
Action Plan Muriqui established three reference institutions for captive breeding of the species, i.e.,
Sorocaba Zoo (São Paulo), Passeio Publico Zoo, Curitiba (Paraná), and Rio de Janeiro Primate Centre.
Some zoos in São Paulo (e.g., Sorocaba and Santos) receive wild-born muriqui pets every year,
originating mostly from palm-harvesters and hunters who have killed the mothers. Conservation
planning for a dedicated breeding program in São Paulo State would greatly enhance our understanding
of southern muriquis as well as providing a backup for population extinctions in the wild.

This species is listed on Appendix I of CITES.

Credits
Assessor(s): Talebi, M., Melo, F., Rylands, A.B., Ferraz, D. da S., Ingberman, B., Mittermeier,
R.A., Martins, M. & Jerusalinsky, L.

Reviewer(s): Schwitzer, C., Cotton, A. & Molur, S.

Facilitators(s) and Angelico, M.

Compiler(s):

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 6
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
Bibliography
Aguirre, A. C. 1971. O mono Brachyteles arachnoides. In: E. Geoffroy (ed.), Situação Atual da Espécie no
Brasil, Academia Brasileira de Ciências, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Antonietto, L. A. and Mendes, F. D. C. 1994. São Francisco Xavier: A new site for primatological research
and conservation in the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Neotropical Primates 2(3): 3-4.

Bronikowski, A. M, Altmann, J., Brockman , D. K., Cords, M., Fedigan, L. M., Pusey, A., Stoinski, T., Morris,
W. F., Strier, K. B and Alberts, S. C. 2011. Aging in the natural world: Comparative data reveal similar
mortality patterns across primates. Science 331: 1325-1328.

Câmara, I. de G. 1995. Muriquis in the Itatiaia National Park, Brazil. Neotropical Primates 3(1): 19.

Carvalho, S., Ferrari, S. F. and Strier, K. B. 2004. Diet of a muriqui group (Brachyteles arachnoides) in
continuous primary forest. Primates 45(3): 201-204.

Coimbra-Filho, A.F., Pissinatti, A. and Rylands, A.B. 1993. Breeding muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides) in
captivity: the experience of the Rio de Janeiro Primate Centre (CPRJ-FEEMA) (Ceboidea, Primates).
Journal of Wildlife Preservation Trusts 29: 66–77.

Coles, R.C. 2009. Fission-fusion Sociality in Southern Muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides) in continuous
Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Biological Anthropology, University of Cambridge.

Coles, R.C.; Lee, P.C. and Talebi, M. 2012. Fission–Fusion Dynamics in Southern Muriquis (Brachyteles
arachnoides) in Continuous Brazilian Atlantic Forest. International Journal of Primatology 33(1): 93-114.

Custódio-Filho, A., Negreiros, O. C., Dias, A. C. and Franco, G. A. D. C. 1992. Composição florística do
estrato arbóreo do Parque Estadual de Carlos Botelho, SP. Segundo Congresso Nacional de Essências
Nativas 1: 184–191.

da Fonseca, G. A., Lemos de Sá, R. M., Pope, T. R., Glander, K. E. and Struhsaker, T. T. 1991. A pilot study
of genetic and morphological variation in the muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides) as a contribution to a
long-term conservation management plan. World Wildlife Fund – US, Washington, DC, USA.

de Oliveira, M. M., Marini-Filho, O. J. and Campos, V. de O. 2005. The International Committee for the
Conservation and Management of Atlantic Forest Atelids. Neotropical Primates 13: 101-104.

Fonseca, G.A. da, Lemos de Sá, R.M., Pope, T.R., Glander, K.E. and Struhsaker, T.T. 1991. A pilot study of
genetic and morphological variation in the muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides) as a contribution to a
long-term conservation management plan. Unpublished report to World Wildlife Fund - U. S.,
Washington, D. C.

Ganzhorn, J.U., Summer Arrigo-Nelson, Sue Boinski, An Bollen, Valentina Carrai, Abigail Derby, Giuseppe
Donati, Andreas Koenig, Martin Kowalewski, Petra Lahann, Ivan Norscia, Sandra Y Polowinsky, Christoph
Schwitzer, Pablo R Stevenson, Mauricio G Talebi, Chia Tan, Erin R Vogel, Patricia C Wright. 2009. Possible
fruit protein effects on primate communities in Madagascar and the Neotropics. PLoS One 4(12): e8253.

Garcia, V. L. A. 2005. Status of the muriqui (Brachyteles Spix, 1823) populations remaining in the state of
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Projeto Muriqui-Rio.

Garcia, V. L. A. and de Andrade Filho, J. M. 2002. Muriquis no Parque Nacional da Serra dos Órgãos.

Gonzalez-Solis, J., Guix, J. C., Mateos, E. and Llorens, L. 2001. Population density of primates in a large
fragment of the Brazilian Atlantic rainforest. Biodiversity and Conservation 10(8): 1267–1282.

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 7
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
Groves, C.P. 2001. Primate Taxonomy. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.

Groves, C.P. 2005. Order Primates. In: D.E. Wilson and D.M. Reeder (eds), Mammal Species of the World,
pp. 111-184. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Hill, W.C.O. 1962. Primates Comparative Anatomy and Taxonomy V. Cebidae Part B. Edinburgh University
Press, Edinburgh, Scotland.

Ingberman, B., Fusco-Costa, R. and Monteiro-Filho, E. L. de A. 2016. A Current Perspective on the

Historical Geographic Distribution of the Endangered Muriquis (Brachyteles spp.): implications for
Conservation. Plos One 11(3): e0150906.

Ingberman, I. 2015. Fatores ecológicos de influência na distribuição geográfica de muriqui (Brachyteles

Spix 1823) e bases para formulação de uma estratégia de conservação para o sul do Brasil. Doctoral
Thesis, Universidade Federal do Paraná.

IUCN. 2019. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019-2. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org.
(Accessed: 04 July 2019).

Koehler, A. B., Pereira, L. C. M., Patricia A. Nicola, P. A., Ângelo, A. C. and Weber, K. S. 2005. The southern
muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides, in the State of Paraná: current distribution, ecology, and the basis for
a conservation strategy. Neotropical Primates 13: 67-72.

Lane, F. 1990. A hunt for “monos” (Brachyteles arachnoides) in the foothills of the Serra da
Paranapiacaba, São Paulo, Brazil. Primate Conservation 11: 23–25.

Lemos de Sá, R.M. and Glander, K.E. 1993. Capture techniques and morphometrics for the woolly spider
monkey, or muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides, E. Geoffroy 1806). American Journal of Primatology 29:
145-152.

Lemos de Sá, R.M., Pope, T.R., Glander, K.E., Struhsaker, T.T. and da Fonseca, G.A.B. 1990. A pilot study of
genetic and morphological variation in the muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides). Primate Conservation 11:
26–30.

Marroig, G. and Sant'Anna, A. B. C. 2001. The occurrence of muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides) in the
Itatiaia National Park, Brazil. Neotropical Primates 9(2): 75.

Martins, M. M. 2003. Estratégias Alimentares e Dispersão de Sementes por Alouatta guariba e

Brachyteles arachnoides em Um Fragmento de Floresta Semidecídua. Doctoral Thesis, Universidade de
São Paulo.

Martins, M. M. 2003. Forest fragments in Barreiro Rico, southeastern Brazil: the need for conservation
action. Neotropical Primates 11(1): 55–56.

Martins, M. M. 2005. Density of primates in four semi-deciduous forest fragments of São Paulo, Brazil.
Biodiversity Conserservation 14(10): 2321–2329.

Martins, M. M. 2005. The southern muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides: ecology of a population in a

semideciduous forest fragment. Neotropical Primates 13: 61–65.

Martins, M. M. 2006. Comparative seed dispersal effectiveness of sympatric Alouatta guariba and
Brachyteles arachnoides in southeastern Brazil. Biotropica 38(1): 57–63.

Melo, F. R. and Dias, L. G. 2005. Muriqui populations reported in the literature over the last 40 years.
Neotropical Primates 13: 19-24.

MG Talebi, R Beltrão‐Mendes, PC Lee. 2009. Intra‐community coalitionary lethal attack of an adult male

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 8
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
southern muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides). American Journal of Primatology 71(10): 860-867.

Milton, K. 1984. Habitat, diet and activity patterns of free-ranging wooly spider monkeys (Brachyteles
arachnoides E. Geoffroy, 1806). International Journal of Primatology 5: 491-514.

Milton, K. 1985. Mating patterns of woolly spider monkeys, Brachyteles arachnoides: implications for
female choice. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 17: 53–59.

Milton, K. 1985. Multimale mating and absence of canine tooth dimorphism in woolly spider monkeys
(Brachyteles arachnoides). American Journal of Physical Anthropology 68: 519–523.

Milton, K. 1986. Ecological background and conservation priorities for woolly spider monkeys
(Brachyteles arachnoides). In: K. Benirschke (ed.), Primates: The Road to Self-Sustaining Populations, pp.
241–250. Springer, New York, USA.

Milton, K. and de Lucca, C. 1984. Population estimate for Brachyteles at Fazenda Barreiro Rico, Sao Paulo
State, Brazil. IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group Newsletter 4: 27-28.

Mittermeier, R. A., Valle, C. M. C., Alves, M. C., Santos, I. B., Pinto, L. P. S., Strier, K. B., Young, A. L.,
Veado, E. M., Constable, I. D., Paccagnella, S. G. and Lemos de Sá, R. M. 1987. Current distribution of the
muriqui in the Atlantic forest region of Eastern Brazil. Primate Conservation 8: 143–149.

Moraes, P. L. 1992. Dispersão de sementes pelo mono-carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides E. Geoffroy,

1806) no Parque Estadual de Carlos Botelho. Revista do Instituto Florestal, São Paulo 4: 1193–1198.

Moraes, P. L. R. 1992. Espécies utilizadas na alimentação no mono-carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides E.

Geoffroy, 1806) no Parque Estadual de Carlos Botelho. Revista do Instituto Florestal, São Paulo 4:
1206–1208.

Nishimura, A., da Fonseca, G. A. B., Mittermeier, R. A., Young, A. L., Strier, K. B. and Valle, C. M. C. 1988.
The muriqui, genus Brachyteles. In: R. A. Mittermeier, A. B. Rylands, A. F. Coimbra-Filho and G. A. B. da
Fonseca (eds), Ecology and Behavior of Neotropical Primates, Vol. 2, pp. 577–610. World Wildlife Fund,
Washington, DC, USA.

Oliveira, M. and Manzatti, L. 1996. New location for the muriqui Brachyteles arachnoides in the state of
São Paulo. Neotropical Primates 4(3): 84–85.

Pacagnella, S. 1991. Censo de população de monos-carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides) no Parque

Estadual de Carlos Botelho, estado de São Paulo. In: A. B. Rylands and A. T. Bernardes (eds), A
Primatologia no Brasil – 3, pp. 225–234. Sociedade Brasileira de Primatologia and Fundacao
Biodiversitas, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

Pacifici, M., Santini, L., Di Marco, M., Baisero, D., Francucci, L., Grottolo Marasini, G., Visconti, P. and
Rondinini, C. 2013. Generation length for mammals. Nature Conservation 5: 87–94.

Petroni, L. 2000. Caracterização da Área de Uso e Dieta do Mono-Carvoeiro (Brachyteles arachnoides,

Cebidae-Primates) na Mata Atlântica, Serra de Paranapiacaba, SP. Doctoral Thesis, Universidade de São
Paulo.

Pinto, L. P. S., Costa, C. M. R., Strier, K. B. and da Fonseca, G. A. B. 1993. Habitat, density and group size
of primates in a Brazilian Tropical forest. Folia Primatologica 61: 135–143.

Pisciotta, K. 2002. The Paranapiacaba forest fragment. In: E. Mateos, J. C. Guix and K. Pisciotta (eds),
Censuses of Vertebrates in a Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest Area, pp. 217. entre de Recursos de
Biodiversitat Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Pissinatti, A. 2005. Management of muriquis (Brachyteles, Primates) in captivity. Neotropical Primates

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 9
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
13: 93-99.

Pissinatti, A., Coimbra-Filho, A. F. and Rylands, A. B. 1998. Observations on reproduction and behavior of
the muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides, in captivity. Neotropical Primates 6(2): 40–45.

Rocha, C. F. D., Bergallo, H. G., Alves, M. A. S. and Sluys, M. V. 2003. A Biodiversidade nos Grandes
Remanescentes Florestais no Estado do Rio de Janeiro e nas Restingas da Mata Atlântica. Univers Idade
Estadula do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Instituto BIOMAS and Conservation International do Brasil, RiMa, São
Carlos, Brazil.

Rylands, A. B., Strier, K. B., Mittermeier, R. A., Borovansky, J. and Seal, U. S. 1998. Population and Habitat
Viability Assessment for the Muriqui (Brachyteles arachnoides). IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding
Specialist Group (CBSG), Apple Valley, Minnesota, USA.

Silva, M. M. 1999. Análise de Viabilidade de uma População de Muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides

Geoffroy, 1806) em São Francisco Xavier, Serra da Mantiqueira – SP. Master’s Thesis, Departamento de
Ecologia, Universidade de Brasília.

Silva, M. S. 1987. A fauna da Serra do Subaio, Guapimirim. Boletim FBCN 22: 71–78.

Strier, K. B. 1999. Faces in the Forest: The Endangered Muriqui Monkeys of Brazil. Harvard University
Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.

Strier, K. B. and da Fonseca, G. A. B. 1997. The endangered muriqui in Brazil’s Atlantic Forest. Primate
Conservation 17: 131–137.

Strier, K. B. and Ziegler, T. E. 1997. Behavioral and endocrine characteristics of the reproductive cycle in
wild muriqui monkeys, Brachyteles arachnoides. American Journal of Primatology 42: 299–310.

Strier, K. B., Possamai, C. B., Tabacow, F. P., Pissinatti, A., Lanna, A. M., Rodrigues de Melo, F., Moreira, L.,
Talebi, M., Breves, P., Mendes, S. L. and Jerusalinsky, L. 2017. Demographic monitoring of wild muriqui
populations: Criteria for defining priority areas and monitoring intensity. Plos ONE 12(12): e0188922.

Talebi, M. 2005. Factors Affecting Food Choice of the Endangered Southern Muriquis (Brachyteles
arachnoides, Primates, E. Geoffroy, 1806) in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Cambridge.

Talebi, M. and Soares, P. 2005. Conservation research on the southern muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides,
in São Paulo state, Brazil. Neotropical Primates 13: 53-59.

Talebi, M., Bastos, A. and Lee, P. C. 2005. Diet of southern muriquis in continuous Brazilian Atlantic
Forest. International Journal of Primatology 26(5): 1175–1187.

Talebi, M. G. 2004. The conservation of southern muriquis (Brachyteles arachnoides – Primates, E.

Geoffroy, 1806) in São Paulo state, Brazil. Folia Primatologica 75(1): 209.

Talebi, M & Lee. P.C. 2010. Activity patterns of Brachyteles arachnoides in the largest remaining
fragment of Brazilian Atlantic Forest. International Journal of Primatology 31(4): 571-583.

Talebi, M, Sala, E., Villani, G.M., Lucas, P.W. van Casteren, A. 2016. Membrane-plate transition in leaves
as an influence on dietary selectivity and tooth form. Journal of Human Evolution 98: 18-26.

Talebi, M & Soares, P.P. 2016. Demography and conservation of southern muriquis (Brachyteles
arachnoides) in São Paulo State. International Journal of Primatology (in press).

Torres de Assumpção, C. 1983. An ecological study of the primates of southeastern Brazil, with a
reappraisal of Cebus apella races. Doctoral Thesis, University of Edinburgh.

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 10
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
Torres de Assumpção, C. 1983. Ecological and behavioral information on Brachyteles arachnoides.
Primates 24: 584–593.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 1999. Convention Concerning the
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. World Heritage Committee. United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Marrakech, Morocco.

Vale Verde Associação do Meio Ambiente. 2006. Website. Available at: www.valeverde.org.br.

Vaz, S. M. 1998. Sobre a occorência do muriqui, Brachyteles arachnoides, em Mambucaba, Rio de

Janeiro, Brasil. Neotropical Primates 6(2): 49–50.

Vieira, C. da C. 1944. Os simios do Estado de São Paulo. Papeis Avulsos, Zoologia, São Paulo 4: 1–31.

Citation
Talebi, M., Melo, F., Rylands, A.B., Ferraz, D. da S., Ingberman, B., Mittermeier, R.A., Martins, M. &
Jerusalinsky, L. 2019. Brachyteles arachnoides. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2019:
e.T2993A17927228. http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en

Disclaimer
To make use of this information, please check the Terms of Use.

External Resources
For Images and External Links to Additional Information, please see the Red List website.

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 11
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
 Appendix

Habitats
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)

Major
Habitat Season Suitability
Importance?

1. Forest -> 1.9. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane - Suitable Yes

Threats
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)

Threat Timing Scope Severity Impact Score

1. Residential & commercial development -> 1.3. Ongoing - - -

Tourism & recreation areas
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & Ongoing - - -

perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.1. Shifting
agriculture
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & Ongoing - - -

perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.2. Small-holder
farming
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & Ongoing - - -

perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.3. Agro-industry
farming
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.2. Wood & pulp Ongoing - - -

plantations -> 2.2.2. Agro-industry plantations
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming Ongoing - - -

& ranching -> 2.3.2. Small-holder grazing, ranching or
farming
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming Ongoing - - -

& ranching -> 2.3.3. Agro-industry grazing, ranching
or farming
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 12
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
 3. Energy production & mining -> 3.2. Mining & Ongoing - - -
quarrying
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping Ongoing - - -

terrestrial animals -> 5.1.1. Intentional use (species is
the target)
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping Ongoing - - -

terrestrial animals -> 5.1.2. Unintentional effects
(species is not the target)
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.3. Logging & wood Ongoing - - -

harvesting -> 5.3.5. Motivation
Unknown/Unrecorded
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

6. Human intrusions & disturbance -> 6.1. Ongoing - - -

Recreational activities
Stresses: 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

7. Natural system modifications -> 7.2. Dams & water Ongoing - - -

management/use -> 7.2.11. Dams (size unknown)
Stresses: 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

Conservation Actions in Place

(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)

Conservation Actions in Place

In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management

Occur in at least one PA: Yes

In-Place Species Management

Subject to ex-situ conservation: Yes

In-Place Education

Included in international legislation: Yes

Subject to any international management/trade controls: Yes

Conservation Actions Needed

(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)

Conservation Actions Needed

1. Land/water protection -> 1.1. Site/area protection

2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 13
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
 Conservation Actions Needed
2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration

3. Species management -> 3.1. Species management -> 3.1.1. Harvest management

3. Species management -> 3.4. Ex-situ conservation -> 3.4.1. Captive breeding/artificial propagation

Research Needed
(http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/classification-schemes)

Research Needed
1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends

1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology

1. Research -> 1.5. Threats

Additional Data Fields

Distribution
Lower elevation limit (m): 400

Upper elevation limit (m): 2050

Population
Continuing decline of mature individuals: Yes

Extreme fluctuations: Yes

Population severely fragmented: Yes

No. of subpopulations: 20

Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations: No

All individuals in one subpopulation: No

Habitats and Ecology

Generation Length (years): 20

© The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: Brachyteles arachnoides – published in 2019. 14
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T2993A17927228.en
The IUCN Red List Partnership

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ is produced and managed by the IUCN Global Species
Programme, the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) and The IUCN Red List Partnership.

The IUCN Red List Partners are: Arizona State University; BirdLife International; Botanic Gardens
Conservation International; Conservation International; NatureServe; Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew;
Sapienza University of Rome; Texas A&M University; and Zoological Society of London.

THE IUCN RED LIST OF THREATENED SPECIES™