Juvenile female MF-07
-
by AnLand moderator
Another juvenile. Pictures not so well, but should be identifiable with the videos
ACP0004nn0
ACP0004nn1Might be the same as here: ACP0004nmz (only here time stamp: 2013-02-14)
Posted
-
by AnLand moderator
I am not sure whether this is the same situation, light is different: ACP0004nmx (with adult female) and ACP0004nmy
Posted
-
by NuriaM scientist, moderator
Hmmm...I am not 100% sure that this one ACP0004nmz is like the two first ones, so I decided to post only the fist two videos.
about the last two ones, we can´t be sure, it´s too risky to guarantee that it´s the same juvenile...let´s wait for more videos, ok?
Posted
-
by ksigler moderator in response to AnLand's comment.
@AnLand - I also thought the chimp in your first post was the same in all the clips (as a single sequence). Besides the face and ears, the lighting (once the camera fully starts in ACP0004nmz - orangey in pic below) and background noise is consistent in all 3 videos.
Glad to finally see an animal drinking water, btw!
I think the infant on your second post is different, and looks much smaller and immature to me. But, no date stamp to help confirm the time difference. 😦
Posted
-
by AnLand moderator
Here some more videos with a time stamp (only in one video) just a minute later: ACP0004nlz, ACP0004nm0, ACP0004nm3 (that seems to be exactly the same video as ACP0004nmz). Also ACP0004nm4 and ACP0004nm5 seem to be the same videos as above. New: ACP0004nm6?
Posted
-
by AnLand moderator
Other repeated videos: ACP0004nmo and ACP0004nmn?
Posted
-
by AnLand moderator
This scene has definitely another date, but the juvenile looks very much the same and I add this here: ACP0004nmr and ACP0004nms. Adult female with infant and juvenile. The smaller one (infant) looks similar to the other one in this thread. No face shots of the trio. The little one drinks again. (I know that means nothing in terms of matching 😉.)
Posted
-
by ksigler moderator
Boy, what a mess. At least there's a pattern to it:
ACP0004nly and ACP0004nmm are not duplicates.
ACP0004nlz and ACP0004nmn are duplicates.
ACP0004nm0 and ACP0004nmo are duplicates.
ACP0004nm1 and ACP0004nmp are duplicates.
ACP0004nm2 and ACP0004nmq are duplicates.
ACP0004nm3 and ACP0004nmz are duplicates.
ACP0004nm4 and ACP0004nn0 (tagged MFJuv06) are duplicates.
ACP0004nm5 and ACP0004nn1 (tagged MFJuv06) are duplicates.
ACP0004nm6 and ACP0004nn2 are duplicates.
ACP0004nm7 and ACP0004nn3 are not duplicates.
I don't know if there are duplicates, and where they may be, for -nmr through -nmy. Hopefully this is enough to troubleshoot. Cross-posting to the discussion on the tech board.
Posted
-
by Quia moderator
I put both IDs of the repeated videos that have chimps in them in the spreadsheet, with a note about the repeated ID. Should make it easy to tell what's going on when trying to ID this little one.
Posted
-
by AnLand moderator in response to ksigler's comment.
Thanks @ksigler and @Quia - I was too lazy yesterday to sort it out and just put it on today's to-do list. So, now I can annotate some more videos ...
Posted
-
by AnLand moderator
By the way, time stamp for the videos of the female with infant above ( ACP0004nmx and ACP0004nmy) is here: ACP0004nmv - it is a continuation. I am very sure about this. I don't know what triggered the motion detector, but as you can hear there are chimps around. Date is 2013-02-16 at 13:46.
Posted
-
by jwidness moderator
I figured out the full sequence of videos here (though not the chimp IDs). Ignoring the duplicates, we have four 1 minute clips:
- 2/14/2013 at 8:32, ACP0004nmz (nn0/nn1/nn2)
- 2/14/2013 at 8:33, ACP0004nmn (nmo/nmp/nmq)
- 2/16/2013 at 13:46, ACP0004nmv (nmw/nmx/nmy)
- 3/2/2013 at 17:04, ACP0004nmr (nms/nmt/nmu)
In the first set of four, a juvenile drinks water, then leaves, followed by either the same juvenile again, or a different one (the second one is MF7Juv06). I think they're different -- MF6Juv06 looks bigger and with darker ears.
The second sequence takes place just a minute later, and I would say it's still MF7Juv06, but the dot on the forehead doesn't seem to be there and the white butt tuft looks a bit different, but maybe it's just the angle. Behaviorally, MF7Juv06 was sort of slow moving and chewing on her lip, and this one is too. The third and fourth videos of this set have no chimps.
In the third set, the first two videos only have a tiny bit of chimp hair visible on the right edge, then an adult female and a small juvenile cross in the last two videos.
In the last set, we see a small juvenile, an adult female, and a large juvenile. I think this is the same adult female and small juvenile as the previous set. The third and fourth videos in this set have no chimps.
I'm going to be really bold and propose these are all videos of the same family -- in the first sequence the younger infant drinks first, followed by the older sibling (MF7Juv06). The second sequence is still MF7Juv06. The third sequence is mom and the younger sibling, and the last sequence is the whole family.
Posted
-
by jwidness moderator
I decided to add screencaps even though some have already been posted.
From the first set, here is a terrible picture of the first juvenile (sorry, it was the best one):
then the second juvenile (MF7Juv06):
From the second set, here is the one I'm suggesting is still MF7Juv06:
From the third set, the adult and the young juvenile (not the best screencaps, sorry):
and from the fourth set, the adult and both juveniles:
Posted
-
by NuriaM scientist, moderator in response to jwidness's comment.
wow, what a great effort you did...
I agree with you that these videos are all part of the same sequence, but I am not sure about your juvenile assumption in the second set; the chimp that you think that is still Juv06 has no dot (as you say).
Thanks!!
Posted
-
by jwidness moderator
I looked back at the videos AnLand posted of the female and infant ( ACP0004nmx and ACP0004nmy) and wondered if they're clear enough for temp names.
Not the best view of her face, but if you pause a little earlier, it's pretty reasonable:
Slimmer build, dark hair, normal ears, relatively straight brows, fairly dark complexion, wider face.Infant, again better views pausing at different spots:
Small but independently mobile, somewhat curved brows, darker around the eyes and lighter around the muzzle, normal ears, fuzzy on the sides of the face, what appears to be a spot just above the left knee.Posted
-
by NuriaM scientist, moderator
#MF7Fem32/Inf21
Posted
-
by AnLand moderator
Now that we gave her an individual ID, I will at least try to suggest a similar pair to look into: MF7Fem19 (her infant seems to have no ID?). ACP0003v5r
What I can see and compare: 1) white spot on the infants left knee, 2) round brows and considerably lighter brows and mouth area in the infant, 3) left ear with similar strong horizontal bend, 4) regular, quite round right ear of the female, 5) straight, protruded brow of the female, 6) similar body build, slightly gray legs (in the black and white footage more pronounced, might be due to the light and camera). Mouth is hardly comparable as MF7Fem19 has food in her mouth. It seems as if she has a beard and small nostrils.
Strong difference in the size of the sexual swelling. I still do not know how to deal with that and which amount of difference is expected and normal.
The above mentioned footage ( ACP0004nmr etc.) shows a similar built female with infant and juvenile. I see here no white spot on the infant's knee. On the other hand, MF7Fem19 is seen with an infant and a juvenile ...
We proposed earlier a match of MF7Fem19 with MF7Fem17. In my opinion, there is still something to look into, but I cannot really find a common perspective to compare MF7Fem17 with MF7Fem32 as shown here. MF7Fem32 seems to be not especially bald. There is not thick fur on the head, but it also does not look bald. Upon further looking into MF7Fem19, I actually also do not see real balding (on that mainly based the matching proposal to MF7Fem17). The light is very strong, but it does not look like reflexion as we would expect on a bald head.
Just some thoughts as we should deal with her now that she has an ID.
Posted
-
by NuriaM scientist, moderator
I can propose Fem19 and Fem32 for a match...your reasoning makes sense (mostly the infant´s knee).
I didn´t ID Fem19`s infant????? poor thing! sorry for that 😦
MF7Fem19/Inf22
Posted