Table 1 Mean (%) contact frequencies (SD) according to great ape species and type of contact in Cameroon

From: Higher convergence of human-great ape enteric eukaryotic viromes in central African forest than in a European zoo: a One Health analysis

  

Longitudinal survey

N = 18, data self-collected daily, 10 months

Questionnaire

N = 449

Contact category

Type of contact

Pan t. troglodytes

Gorilla g. gorilla

Wilcoxon Test

Pan t. troglodytes

Gorilla g. gorilla

Wilcoxon Test

Environmental contact

Seen feces

2.3 (5.3)

3.5 (5.3)

NS

NA

NA

NA

Seen food remains

2.5 (5.3)

4.0 (5.6)

NS

NA

NA

NA

Seen nest

1.9 (3.5)

1.5 (2.3)

NS

NA

NA

NA

Seen footprints

2.2 (5.2)

3.8 (5.3)

NS

NA

NA

NA

Direct contact

Seen alive

1.8 (5.1)

1.8 (4.1)

NS

14.2 (31.4)a

9.1a (22.3)

NS

Heard

3.2 (5.3)

2.6 (4.2)

NS

14.2a (31.4)

9.1a (22.3)

NS

Physical contact

Hunt

0 (0, 0-0)

0 (0, 0-0)

NS

0.08 (0.7)

0.07 (0.3)

P = 0.059 W = 103,997

Butcher

0.1 (0.3)

0.2 (0.3)

NS

0.7 (2.2)

1.6 (7.3)

P < 0.001 W = 116,996

Cook

0.1 (0.4)

0.2 (0.6)

NS

0.6 (2.1)

1.0 (2.7)

P < 0.001 W = 119,923

Consume

0.2 (0.5)

1.1 (2.5)

NS

0.7 (2.2)

1.7 (7.3)

P < 0.001 W = 118,773

Buy/Sell

0.5 (1.2)

1.1 (2.6)

NS

0.4 (1.6)

1.3 (7.1)

P < 0.001 W = 115,929

  1. Physical contact frequencies are from Narat et al. 2018. We compared the mean contact frequency, for each type of contact between humans and chimpanzees and between humans and gorillas, based on the longitudinal survey and questionnaire dataset with two-sided Mann–Whitney statistical tests. P values < 0.05 are in bold.
  2. NS Not significant, NA Not addressed in questionnaires.
  3. aIn the questionnaires, direct contact was considered to be one contact type (seen alive or heard).