One Genus or Two? Evaluating Whether Gracile and Robust Capuchin Monkeys are Validly Classified as Separate Genera Based on Craniofacial Shape

Assessments of whether closely related species should be classified into more than one genus have been a longstanding source of controversy in primatology. For example, researchers hold differing opinions about whether cebine species should be classified into one or two genera. In this study, we investigated whether craniofacial shape is a reliable taxonomic indicator among cebines and statistically evaluated whether the magnitude of craniofacial shape differences observed among gracile and robust capuchin species is consistent with a two-genus taxonomic framework. We quantify craniofacial shape using 3D landmark data taken from 72 surface models, representing five cebine species (Cebus albifrons, C. capucinus, C. olivaceus, C. (Sapajus) libidinosus, and C. (S.) macrocephalus). We find that although statistically significant shape differences exist between gracile and robust capuchins in all four craniofacial regions investigated (face and palate, basicranium, calvarium, and frontal region of the calvarium), the magnitude of shape differences between species pairs does not support gracile and robust species being classified into separate genera. The shape of the frontal region of the calvarium and the face and palate show the highest magnitude of shape differences between the gracile and robust capuchin groups, and both regions are good taxonomic predictors, showing correct classification rates of 97% and 96%, respectively. At the species-level, face and palate shape is the only craniofacial measure that consistently shows high classification rates among species (84-97% for combined-sex analyses). Our findings suggest that robust capuchin species that are often assigned to Sapajus may be more appropriately considered as Cebus under a single-genus framework for cebines based on craniofacial shape evidence.