The chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) is well-known in both nature and captivity as an impressive maker and user of tools, but recently the New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) has been championed as ...being equivalent or superior to the ape in elementary technology. I systematically compare the two taxa, going beyond simple presence/absence scoring of tool-using and -making types, on four more precise aspects of material culture: (i) types of associative technology (tools used in combination); (ii) modes of tool making; (iii) modes of tool use; and (iv) functions of tool use. I emphasize tool use in nature, when performance is habitual or customary, rather than in anecdotal or idiosyncratic. On all four measures, the ape shows more variety than does the corvid, especially in modes and functions that go beyond extractive foraging. However, more sustained field research is required on the crows before this contrast is conclusive.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, NMLJ, NUK, PNG, SAZU, UL, UM, UPUK
The role of invertebrates in the evolution of human diet has been under-studied by comparison with vertebrates and plants. This persists despite substantial knowledge of the importance of the ‘other ...faunivory’, especially insect-eating, in the daily lives of non-human primates and traditional human societies, especially hunters and gatherers. Most primates concentrate on two phyla, Mollusca and Arthropoda, but of the latter's classes, insects (especially five orders: Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, Isoptera, Lepidoptera, Orthoptera) are paramount. An insect product, bees' honey, is particularly important, and its collection shows a reversal of the usual sexual division of labor. Human entomophagy involves advanced technology (fire, containers) and sometimes domestication. Insectivory provides comparable calorific and nutritional benefits to carnivory, but with different costs. Much insectivory in hominoids entails elementary technology used in extractive foraging, such as termite fishing by chimpanzees. Elucidating insectivory in the fossil and paleontological record is challenging, but at least nine avenues are available: remains, lithics, residues, DNA, coprolites, dental microwear, stable isotopes, osteology, and depictions. All are in play, but some have been more successful so far than others.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Modelling the behaviour of extinct hominins is essential in order to devise useful hypotheses of our species' evolutionary origins for testing in the palaeontological and archaeological records. One ...approach is to model the last common ancestor (LCA) of living apes and humans, based on current ethological and ecological knowledge of our closest living relations. Such referential modelling is based on rigorous, ongoing field studies of the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and the bonobo (Pan paniscus). This paper reviews recent findings from nature, focusing on those with direct implications for hominin evolution, e.g. apes, using elementary technology to access basic resources such as food and water, or sheltering in caves or bathing as thermoregulatory adaptations. I give preference to studies that directly address key issues, such as whether stone artefacts are detectible before the Oldowan, based on the percussive technology of hammer and anvil use by living apes. Detailed comparative studies of chimpanzees living in varied habitats, from rainforest to savannah, reveal that some behavioural patterns are universal (e.g. shelter construction), while others show marked (e.g. extractive foraging) or nuanced (e.g. courtship) cross-populational variation. These findings allow us to distinguish between retained, primitive traits of the LCA versus derived ones in the human lineage.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, NMLJ, NUK, PNG, SAZU, UL, UM, UPUK
Chimpanzee Technology McGrew, William C.
Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science),
04/2010, Volume:
328, Issue:
5978
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Chimpanzees are the only nonhuman animal species known to make and use a wide range of complex tools.
Almost 50 years ago, Jane Goodall watched an adult male chimpanzee in the Gombe Stream Reserve, ...Tanzania, make and use a blade of grass to “fish” termites from a mound for food (
1
). Her mentor, Louis Leakey, declared, “Now we must redefine ‘tool,’ redefine ‘man,’ or accept chimpanzees as humans!” (
2
). Today, we know that various vertebrates in nature have elementary technology, but chimpanzees across Africa continue to astonish us with their technical abilities. Recent findings have further blurred the boundaries between what we consider to be human versus nonhuman by showing that chimpanzees can use and combine tools in complex sequences and combinations.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, NMLJ, NUK, PNG, SAZU, UL, UM, UPUK
6.
Sheltering Chimpanzees McGrew, William C.
Primates,
05/2021, Volume:
62, Issue:
3
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Author Affiliation: (1) School of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, South Street, Fife, KY16 9AJ, St Andrews, Scotland, UK (a) wcm2@st-andrews.ac.uk Article History: Registration ...Date: 03/23/2021 Online Date: 04/09/2021 Byline:
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Novels about great apes and humans continue to be consistently popular with the reading public, sometimes reaching best-seller status. Media reviews of these books rarely comment on their ...primatological roots, nor do primatological journals review them. In a non-quantitative, pilot study, I scrutinize six prominent novels, in terms of three questions: How do the novels make use of primatology? What aspects of primatology do they use? How accurate is their use of primatology? Such novels overwhelmingly concentrate on language, with intelligence and sexuality lagging far behind; other topics, such as culture or technology, receive little or no attention. Apes in nature are rarely mentioned. Inaccuracies abound, even at the most basic level of primatological knowledge that easily could be remedied. Both authors and primatologists would benefit from more informative interaction before publication.
Full text
Available for:
EMUNI, FIS, FZAB, GEOZS, GIS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, MFDPS, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, SBMB, SBNM, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VKSCE, ZAGLJ
Geographical variation in behaviour may be best explained in terms of culture if ecological and genetic explanations can be excluded. However, ecological conditions and genetic predispositions may in ...turn also affect cultural processes. We examined the influence of environmental factors on foraging tool use among chimpanzees at the Seringbara study site in the Nimba Mountains, Guinea, where nut cracking and termite fishing are absent, but ant dipping is present. We tested two ecological hypotheses to explain foraging tool use prevalence. The opportunity hypothesis states that encounter rates with nuts, insects or tools explain tool use patterns. We measured the density and distribution of nut trees, nuts, army ants, termites and potential tools in relation to the chimpanzees' ranging patterns. The necessity hypothesis states that tool use is a response to scarcity of preferred foods (i.e. ripe fruit). We measured the temporal availability of nuts, army ants and termites in relation to preferred food sources. Our findings support the opportunity hypothesis: nut trees and Macrotermes mounds were rare and peripheral to the chimpanzees' range, whereas army ants were abundant and widespread. The necessity hypothesis did not explain tool-assisted insectivory, as both army ants and termites were available during ripe fruit scarcity, yet neither ant dipping nor termite fishing functioned as fallback strategies. Nuts were absent at times of fruit scarcity and were not available as fallback foods. Our findings highlight the importance of considering environmental conditions in explaining foraging tool use by wild chimpanzees and emphasize the interplay between environment and culture.
► We examined the influence of environmental conditions on chimpanzee foraging tool use. ► We tested predictions of the opportunity and necessity hypotheses. ► Ecological opportunity explained presence and absence of tool use variants. ► Food scarcity did not lead to an increase in feeding tool use. ► Our study highlights the interplay between environment and culture.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
9.
Apes in the Anthropocene: flexibility and survival Hockings, Kimberley J.; McLennan, Matthew R.; Carvalho, Susana ...
Trends in ecology & evolution,
April 2015, 2015-Apr, 2015-04-00, 20150401, Volume:
30, Issue:
4
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
•Few great ape habitats are entirely unaffected by human activities.•Anthropogenic impacts are triggering behavioural flexibility in great apes.•Research across the ‘anthropogenic continuum’ can ...advance pure and applied science.•Survival of many ape populations requires finding ways for human–ape coexistence.
We are in a new epoch, the Anthropocene, and research into our closest living relatives, the great apes, must keep pace with the rate that our species is driving change. While a goal of many studies is to understand how great apes behave in natural contexts, the impact of human activities must increasingly be taken into account. This is both a challenge and an opportunity, which can importantly inform research in three diverse fields: cognition, human evolution, and conservation. No long-term great ape research site is wholly unaffected by human influence, but research at those that are especially affected by human activity is particularly important for ensuring that our great ape kin survive the Anthropocene.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Is human handedness unique? That is, do our nearest living relations, chimpanzee and bonobo (Pan spp.) show species‐wide handedness, as is seen in living Homo sapiens? The answer may depend on ...definition: Handedness (congruence across subjects and across tasks) should be distinguished from hand preference (within subject and task), manual specialization (within subject, across tasks), and task specialization (across subjects, within task). Comparison is required at both population and species level. Several methodological issues (e.g., ecological validity) are crucial, as are major confounding variables (e.g., bimanuality). The behavioral manual laterality of chimpanzees is well‐studied in a variety of contexts. Especially important is tool use, which seems to enhance extent of lateralization, but this varies both within and across populations. There is much evidence for task specialization in chimpanzees, but no conclusive evidence of handedness in the strictest sense. Thus, human handedness seems to be unique among living hominoids.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, IZUM, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
