Abstract: If, in a mix-up at a costume shop, a couple were issued the front half of a zebra suit and the back half of a horse, it could be considered a quagga disguise. But if the masqueraders were pressed as to whether they were more horse or more zebra, the latest biochemical research advises them to insist on zebra.
The quagga, a South African animal extinct for more than 100 years, has been a source of confusion among taxonomists. Some contend, on the basis of the quagga skins preserved in museums, that this front-striped animal is a zebra, either a fourth zebra species or a variant of the Plains zebra, whose hindquarter stripes are dim. But others have argued that the quagga's teeth and skeleton indicate that its nearest relative is the true horse.
Biochemists joined the fray last year when muscle tissue was obtained from a salt-preserved quagga pelt in a West German museum. The tissue yielded both proteins and genes that could be analyzed (SN:6/9/84, p. 356).
Now the analysis has yielded some results. According to “remarkably concordant” findings on the proteins and on the genes, the quagga was a subspecies of the Plains zebra, says Jerold M. Lowenstein of the University of California at San Francisco. He looked at the binding between a sample of quagga proteins and mixtures of antibodies that bind to blood-serum proteins of each of the extant Equus species. The quagga sample bound more of the antibodies against Plains zebra serum than against the other species. Lowenstein calculates that the quagga relationship with the Plains zebra is six times closer than its relationship with the two other zebra species.
“We had to use special techniques to show the difference,” Lowenstein told SCIENCE NEWS. “There is 99 percent identity on the protein level. All the [Equus] species diverged within the past 5 million years, which is only yesterday in evolutionary terms.”
The quagga-Plains zebra relationship is further supported by the analysis of quagga mitochondrial genes performed by Russell Higuchi and Allan Wilson at the University of California at Berkeley. They find seven times as great a difference between quagga and Mountain zebra DNA as they do between quagga and Plains zebra DNA.
“Stripes, the molecules tell us, do make a zebra,” Lowenstein concludes in the July 18 NEW SCIENTIST, “and the half-striped quagga was a Plains zebra.”

Abstract: Recent attempts to teach apes rudimentary grammatical skills have produced negative results. The basic obstacle appears to be at the level of the individual symbol which, for apes, functions only as a demand. Evidence is lacking that apes can use symbols as names, that is, as a means of simply transmitting information. Even though non-human animals lack linguistic competence, much evidence has recently accumulated that a variety of animals can represent particular features of their environment. What then is the non-verbal nature of animal representations? This question will be discussed with reference to the following findings of studies of serial learning by pigeons. While learning to produce a particular sequence of four elements (colours), pigeons also acquire knowledge about the relation between non-adjacent elements and about the ordinal position of a particular element. Learning to produce a particular sequence also facilitates the discrimination of that sequence from other sequences.

Abstract: Feral and laboratory flocks of rock doves ( ) show a pattern of grouped sequential exploitation when simultaneously presented with two dispersed, depleting patches of seed. This behavior contrasts with the ideal free distribution pattern shown when patches are small and concentrated. Grouped sequential exploitation consists of two phases: all pigeons first land together and feed at one patch, then leave one by one for the other patch. Departure times of individuals for the second patch are correlated with feeding rate at patch 1, which is in turn correlated with position in the dominance hierarchy. The decision to switch from patch 1 to patch 2 improves individual feeding rates in all cases, but is done slightly later than it should according to optimal foraging theory.

Abstract: The structure of primate communities living in a number of undisturbed areas is described and compared. Species richness is highest in tropical rain forests of Africa and South America, where up to 14 different species can share the same habitat. The number of sympatric primates in woodlands and savannas is always much lower. Some striking differences in community structure may be observed between communities living in apparently similar habitats. Three major factors may be held responsible for such discrepancies: history and paleoecology, present spatial heterogeneity of the vegetation, and competition with other taxonomic groups. The role of primates in the functioning of forest ecosystems is discussed. Though their trophic impact may be important, the role they play in seed dispersal appears to be more significant; they contribute greatly to homeostasis, as well as to regeneration, of the rain forests. A number of ecological traits are particularly developed among primates and may have contributed to the rapid evolutionary success of the order. Their predominantly vegetarian diet allows them to build up higher population densities than sympatric carnivorous mammals;their arborealism permits them to make use of all edible plant material available in a tridimensional environment; the opportunistic tendencies of some cebids, cercopithecids, and pongids enable them to take advantage of a variety of habitats and situations; and finally, an extended socialization period and a long life-span, allowing them to develop social traditions, give to many of them a further possibility to adapt quickly to novel situations.