# Evaluating the Use of Chemical Weapons for Capturing Prey by a Venomous Mammal, the Greater Slow Loris (Nycticebus coucang)

## TL;DR

This study finds that venom in greater slow lorises is not used to capture prey but likely serves a defensive purpose.

## Contribution

The study experimentally tests and refutes the hypothesis that slow loris venom is used for prey capture.

## Key findings

- Venom-related behaviors in greater slow lorises occurred only in defensive contexts.
- Slow lorises captured prey using manual grasping, not venom.
- The study supports venom's role in intraspecific competition or defense rather than prey capture.

## Abstract

Having venom is a rare trait among mammals and even rarer among primates. Slow and pygmy lorises are the only venomous primates, and they possess a unique “two-step” venom system. When threatened, they release a secretion from a gland on their forearm and lick it, activating the venom by mixing it with their saliva. There are several hypotheses for why slow and pygmy lorises evolved this unique trait. Venom can be used to capture prey, to defend against predators or parasites, or for competition with other slow or pygmy lorises. We tested the hypothesis that venom is used to capture prey by experimentally offering various arthropod prey items to 22 wild-caught greater slow lorises living in a rescue center. We observed how their behavior was affected by prey characteristics including size, potential for escape, and toxicity. The few venom-related behaviors we observed only occurred in a defensive context, suggesting that the greater slow lorises do not use their venom as a means of subduing prey. These negative results are consistent with the growing body of evidence that pygmy and slow lorises primarily use venom in competition with members of their own species.

Few mammals are venomous, including one group of primates—slow (Nycticebus spp.) and pygmy (Xanthonycticebus spp.) lorises. Hypotheses for the evolutionary function of venom in these primates include defense from predators or ectoparasites, communication or competition with conspecifics, and the capture of prey. We tested the prey capture hypothesis in 75 trials with 22 wild-caught greater slow lorises (N. coucang) housed in a rescue center in Java, Indonesia. We experimentally offered the slow lorises arthropod prey items varying in size, escape potential, and toxicity and recorded venom-related and predatory behaviors using live and video observations. The slow lorises visually targeted arthropod prey, approached it quickly and efficiently, and captured it with a manual grasping motion. They rarely performed venom-related behaviors and seemed to do so in a defensive context. The slow lorises exhibited little variation in pre-capture behavior as a function of prey size or escape potential. In response to noxious prey, the slow lorises performed tongue-flicking and other investigative behaviors that indicate they are using chemosensory input to assess prey characteristics. These data suggest it is unlikely that slow lorises use chemical weapons to subdue arthropod prey and may support, instead, a defensive function for slow loris venom.