This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Paranormal This redirect falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal Cryptozoology Mid‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptozoology, an attempt to improve coverage of the pseudoscience and subculture of cryptozoology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the redirect attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CryptozoologyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptozoologyTemplate:WikiProject CryptozoologyCryptids Mid This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Primates Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Skepticism Low‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Would there be any correlation between De Loy's Ape (Loysi) and Bigfoot? Should we make note in the article of this possible correlation? (both are large, unknown "primates," who walk bi-pedal)--Jennifer M 01:19, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"We", the encyclopedia authors, shouldn't make any speculation. However, it is OK for us to [i]report[/i] speculations which have previously been published. So if you can find evidence that some noted cryptozoologist said or wrote that she thinks [i]A. loysi[/i] is Bigfoot, then go ahead and mention that. —Psychonaut 06:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No real connection in the sense of a relationship. The common features are pretty much limited to what you state: 2 unknown primates that are said to walk upright. There is no question that the red South American ape (also called the 'Didi') is an ape, while all reports of the North American Bigfoot/Sasquatch complex stress how 'human' they appear up close. Even De Loys' report mentions that the apes approached them from the trees, then stood upright. CFLeon 02:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be this can definitely be classified as a platyrrhine. Look at the nose: it's just nostrils, no external structure. Probably a big spider monkey relative. What does everyone else think? -- Mike Keesey

Several commentators have suggested that. Although the thing looks basically like a Spider Monkey, there are some differences. The face appears flatter for instance. Heuvelmans covers the arguement in On the Track of Unknown Animals as much as I've seen, including comparative pics. He also includes a photo of a spider monkey standing upright. It's certainly conceivable that a Spider Monkey-type may have evolved larger size and lost its tail as it came down from the trees, just as what happened in Africa. It's really too bad that De Loys did not take a second photo in profile or include something of known size in the picture. CFLeon 21:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about the hypothesis that this is a spider monkey that was suffering from gigantism? It does also seem to have a few acromegalic characteristics. As for the taillessness, we cannot see it, and de Loys might as well have been inventing that part.

Cú Faoil, 15.55, 21 December 2006 (GMT)

Good point, never thought of that. Possible certainly, probable no: 1, gigantism is to begin with in homeotherms; size is among the most tightly genetically controlled phenes in small and mid-sized mammals and in birds. 2, non-humans (even primates) don't have the medical and social skills that enable us to make it work usually. Most gigantistic nonhumans die before reaching adulthood = actually becoming larger than normal. 3, One - possible enough. But a pair? The odds are astronomical against. Dysmorodrepanis 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It says on the article that De Loy killed the female, but it looks like the photo is a male. Can anybody give any credible evidence that the photo is of a female? Punk18

I personally can't, but New World Monkeys, and Spider Monkeys in particular, are known for enlarged clitorises. I do not know if this is a general condition or more prominent in some individuals. Heuvelmans mentions the fact and assures it to be a female, although he does not say based on what feature. CFLeon 02:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it definately looks like a -rather enormous, especially for a nonhuman primate- penis. And the overall musculature looks more male than female. Unless that is the tail (it appears as if it is slightly asymetrical on the groin area, if it is a penis.) [unsigned]

If DeLoy is to be believed on anything, the animal did NOT have a tail. (It's not clear if there might have been a vestigal stub.) All of my work was with African monkeys (Dianas and Vervets in particular), so I have no details on the actual appearance of Spider Monkeys' genitalia, other than second-hand accounts and what's in the literature. I still have some contacts at the zoo, though; I'll ask around. CFLeon 08:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Female spider monkeys are rather well endowed. If you know, Cercopithecidae, you might as well take them for the males if you don't know what to expect... I don't know whether the genital would not hang down and become longer due to flaccidity and blood following gravity after death. ISBN 052153738X, notably ch.5, seems a good source to consult for details and images of the real thing. Dysmorodrepanis 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The original French journal article by Montadon specifies it as a large clitoris, which is mentioned in Keith's English response: "...the animal is alleged to have the large clitoris of spider monkeys..." --18:36, 27 July 2018 (UTC)~

Of the 7 species, Ateles belzebuth (White-fronted) and Ateles hybridus (Brown) are probable, and Ateles fusciceps (Black-headed) and Ateles geoffroyi (Geoffroy's) are barely possible candidates for spider monkeys encountered by de Loys' expedition, FWIW. I remember reading belzebuth but not hypridus specifically, though whether this is based on good analysis or just ignorance about the latter I know not. Dysmorodrepanis 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should it not be François de Loys? Dysmorodrepanis 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume nobody has ever tried reproducing the photo with a dead A. belzebuth (or hybridus, etc.) and a box of the right size (i.e. gauging the size by the monkey and not by assuming it was that-and-that kind of box) and see where it'll get you, no? Enterprising Wikipedians, here might be your chance to be famous. Be aware that playing around with dead spider monkeys or parts thereof w/o valid paperwork constitutes a criminal offense in most jurisdictions. Dysmorodrepanis 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's be absolutely clear on that: did de Loys say they shat in their hands, or does he just say that they threw poo at them? Because the former would be nearly unheard-of I think, whereas the latter, though happening less often as common wisdom'd have it, is well possible. The entire attack story reeks a bit; running howling at a camp of strangers (that have been there for how long?) in attack is more in line with pulp fiction of that time than with primate behavior. Usual reaction would be discreet observation and sorta "piqued" avoidance, or an outright mock attack to test the intruders, in true apes, whereas Neotropicals would probably be rather oblivious to something large, new and loud after they got used to it, if it doesn't unduly fell forest. Dysmorodrepanis 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone else is curious: yes, it absolutely says that in the French journal article by Montadon. --tronvillain (talk) 18:27, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A good (!) scan of the original photo, or as close as one can ever get, would be desirable. Dysmorodrepanis 01:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why was the full photo removed? I've never seen it in any other source. Why is the cropped close-up alright but not the original? CFLeon 08:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. A repro of the original photo should be eligible for fair use, the cropped version - if not public domain - is probably a copyvio. Dysmorodrepanis 13:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its hard to imagine that anyone retains the exclusive rights to the original photo after so many decades have passed. The photo was widely distributed and reproduced in many forms over the years. A photo has been published here: http://historyofgeology.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/de-loys-ape/Landroo (talk) 19:01, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on De Loys' Ape. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081120184323/http://www.theastralworld.com/cryptozoology/deloysape.php to http://www.theastralworld.com/cryptozoology/deloysape.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:45, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keith doesn't actually suggest a specific species of spider monkey, saying "Let me say at once that on the evidence submitted regarding the nature of Ameranthropoides loysi - the alleged anthropoid of South America - it is only possible for those familiar wit the anatomy of apes to come to one conclusion, namely: that a mistake has been made and that the animal in question belongs to the genus Ateles; in brief, it is a spider monkey - whether of a known species we cannot say, owing to a lack of evidence." He also doesn't suggest a scientific name, only pointing out that "Neverthreless Dr. Montadon goes on to name the animal, not Ateles loysi, but Ameranthropoides loysi. He would have shown greater zoological acumen if the had stuck by his reservation." --tronvillain (talk) 14:46, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]