Primate Remains from African Crowned Eagle (Stephanoaetus coronatus) Nests in Ivory Coast’s Tai Forest: Implications for Primate Predation and Early Hominid Taphonomy in South Africa W. Scott McGraw, 1 * Catherine Cooke, 1 and Susanne Shultz 2 1 Department of Anthropology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1364 2 Population Biology Research Group, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK KEY WORDS monkeys; raptors; predation; Taung child ABSTRACT Understanding the initial processes of deposition can help with interpretations of fossil assem- blages. Here we discuss the taphonomy of primate remains collected under 16 nests of African crowned eagles (Stephanoaetus coronatus) in the Tai Forest, Ivory Coast. From 1,200 bones collected, including 669 primate bones, we calculated minimum number of individuals (MNI), survivability profiles, and damage profiles using methods identical to those employed by Sanders et al. ([2003] J. Hum. Evol. 44:87–105) in their analysis of bones from eagle nests in Uganda. Crowned eagles leave a con- sistent taphonomic signature on their prey remains; hence, results from our analysis of the Tai assemblage are similar to those from the Ugandan sample. Hindlimb and cranial bones are relatively abundant in the sample, while ribs, vertebrae, carpals, and tarsals do not survive well. Primate crania typically display puncture marks around the eye, long bones remain largely intact, and scapulae ex- hibit raked breakage. These data have implications for understanding the dynamic between extant primates and one of their principle predators, as well as the taphonomy of hominid-bearing caves in South Africa. We concur with Berger and Clarke ([1995] J. Hum. Evol. 29:275–299) that a large raptor could have been responsible for the death of the Taung child, Australopithecus africanus. Am J Phys Anthropol 131:151–165, 2006. V V C 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Anthropologists have long had a keen interest in the behavior of primates as both predators and prey (e.g., Lee, 1968; Brain, 1981; Stanford, 1998; Hart and Sussman, 2005). Predation likely plays a significant role in primate mortality, and is widely regarded as a prime mover in the evolution of primate sociality (Van Schaik, 1983; Boinski and Chapman, 1995; Hill and Lee, 1998; Treves, 1999; Boinski et al., 2003; Janson, 2003). The main primate predators are large cats, raptors, snakes, chimpanzees, and humans (Cheney and Wrangham, 1987). In general, these primate predators can be classified as either pursuit or ambush hunters, and the differences in hunting strat- egies are reflected in a monkey’s responses to each preda- tor type (Noe and Bshary, 1997; Zuberbuhler, 2000, 2001). For example, chimpanzees are pursuit hunters who ini- tially search for and approach monkey groups in silence. Hunts by chimpanzees in the Ivory Coast’s Tai Forest are cooperative activities involving multiple hunters that last up to 40 min (Boesch and Boesch-Achermann, 2000). In most cases, monkeys killed by Tai chimpanzees are aware they have been targeted; after giving an initial alarm call, monkeys typically fall silent at the sound of approaching chimpanzees, who nevertheless continue to pursue after the alarm is made. The attacking strategies of pursuit hunt- ers such as chimpanzees are well-documented (Boesch and Boesch, 1989; Boesch, 1994; Stanford et al., 1994). In contrast to pursuit predators, ambush predators rely more on surprise. Leopards in the Tai Forest are typical ambush hunters that hide in patches of dense under- growth and wait motionless to surprise unsuspecting monkeys (Zuberbuhler and Jenny, 2002). Raptors are also ambush predators, and are believed to exert significant selective pressure on primates (Terborgh, 1983; Cheney and Wrangham, 1987; Gautier-Hion et al., 1983; Isbell, 1994; Csermely, 1996; Zinner and Pelaz, 1999; Karpanty, 2003; Karpanty and Grella, 2001; Shultz, 2002; Gild-da- Costa et al., 2003; Kerbis et al., 2004; Shultz et al., 2004). Ambush hunters such as raptors and leopards may stalk prey for extended periods of time (Zuberbuhler et al., 1999; Shultz, 2001). However, the attack distance tends to be short, such that capture and attack are essentially si- multaneous events. Considering the potential irregularity and short duration of ambush hunts, as well as the required secrecy on the part of the predator, collecting sys- tematic data on ambush hunters under natural conditions is difficult. For these reasons, observations of ambush hunting behavior on primates in forested environments are largely opportunistic, and systematic data on attacks Grant sponsor: Leakey Foundation; Grant sponsor: Wildlife Conser- vation Society; Grant sponsor: Peregrine Fund; Grant sponsor: National Science Foundation; Grant sponsor: British Council; Grant sponsor: University of Liverpool; Grant sponsor: Ohio State University. *Correspondence to: W. Scott McGraw, Department of Anthropol- ogy, Ohio State University, 114 Lord Hall, 124 West 17th Ave., Columbus, OH 43210-1364. E-mail: mcgraw.43@osu.edu Received 20 July 2005; accepted 26 September 2005. DOI 10.1002/ajpa.20420 Published online 4 April 2006 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). V V C 2006 WILEY-LISS, INC. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 131:151–165 (2006)