PRIMATES: CEBIDAE 121 



Order PRIMATES 



Suborder ANTHROPOIDEA 



Superfamily CEBOIDEA 



Family Cebidae 



Subfamily aotinae (douroucoulis) 



Genus AOTUS Humboldt 

 1811. Aotus Humboldt, Recueil d'observations de zoologie et d'anatomie com- 

 pared; . . . , in Humboldt and Bonpland, Voyage aux regions equinoxiales 

 du nouveau continent, . . . , pt. 2, [Zoology], vol. 1, p. 358. (Type, Simia 

 trivirgata Humboldt. For use of Aotus in place of Nyctipithecus Spix (Si- 

 miarum et vespertilionum Brasiliensium . . . , p. 24, 1823) see Palmer. 

 Science, new ser., vol. 10, p. 493, Oct. 6, 1899.) 



Aotus bipunctatus Bole 



1937. Aotus bipunctatus Bole, Sci. Publ. Cleveland Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. 7, p. 

 152, Aug. 31, 1937. 



Type Locality. — Paracote, 3 miles east of Monti jo Bay, and iy 2 miles south 

 of mouth of Rio Angulo, Veraguas, Panama. 



Aotus rufipes (Sclater) 



1872. Nyctipithecus rufipes Sclater, Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1872, pt. 1, p. 3, 



June 1872. 

 1884. Nyctipithecus rufipes True, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 7 (App., Circ. 



29), p. 611, Nov. 29, 1884. 

 1901. Aotus rufipes Miller and Rehn, Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. 30, p. 



298, Dec. 27, 1901. 

 Type Locality. — Said to be San Juan del Norte, Nicaragua. (According to 

 J. A. Allen, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist, vol. 28, p. 114, Apr. 30, 1910, this is 

 "unquestionably erroneous." See also Hershkovitz, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 

 98, p. 405, May 10, 1949.) 



Aotus vociferans (Spix) 

 1823. Nyctipithecus vociferans Spix, Simiarum et vespertilionum Brasilien- 

 sium, . . . , p. 25. 

 1884. Nyctipithecus vociferans True, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 7 (App., Circ. 



29), p. 611, Nov. 29, 1884. 

 1912. A[otus] vociferans Elliot, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. 31, p. 33, 



Mar. 4, 1912. 

 Type Locality. — Tabatinga, Amazonas, Brazil. Range. — A specimen is said 

 to have been taken in the forest of Quindin, Costa Rica (Sclater, Proc. Zool. 

 Soc. London, 1872, pt. 1, p. 3, June 1872), but this record is almost certainly 

 erroneous (Elliot, A review of the Primates, vol. 2 (1912), pp. 14-15, June 15, 

 1913), and the species should be omitted from the North American list. Re- 



