Wild macaques challenge the origin of intentional tool production

Proffitt, Tomos; Reeves, Jonathan; Braun, David R.; Malaivijitnond, Suchinda; Luncz, Lydia V.

doi:10.1126/sciadv.ade8159

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Occasionally, mishits of the stone hammer against the anvil result in small stone fragments breaking off 8 , 9 . In some aspects, these detached pieces bear some resemblance to hominin-produced flakes found in the archaeological record 8 – 12 . However, these fragments are not subsequently used by the chimpanzees as cutting tools 8 , 9 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Naïve, adult, captive chimpanzees do not socially learn how to make and use sharp stone tools

Bandini,

Tennie

2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although once regarded as a unique human feature, tool-use is widespread in the animal kingdom. Some of the most proficient tool-users are our closest living relatives, chimpanzees. These repertoires however consist primarily of tool use, rather than tool manufacture (for later use). Furthermore, most populations of chimpanzees use organic materials, such as sticks and leaves, rather than stones as tools. This distinction may be partly ecological, but it is also important as chimpanzees are often used as models for the evolution of human material culture, the oldest traces of which consist of manufactured sharp stone tools (so-called “flakes”). Thus, examining the conditions (if any) under which chimpanzees may develop flake manufacture and use can provide insight into the drivers of these behaviours in our own lineage. Previous studies on non-human apes’ ability to make and use flakes focused on enculturated apes, giving them full demonstrations of the behaviour immediately, without providing social information on the task in a stepwise manner. Here we tested naïve, captive chimpanzees (N = 4; three potentially enculturated and one unenculturated subject) in a social learning experimental paradigm to investigate whether enculturated and/or unenculturated chimpanzees would develop flake making and use after social information of various degrees (including a human demonstration) was provided in a scaffolded manner. Even though social learning opportunities were provided, neither the unenculturated subject nor any of the potentially enculturated subjects made or used flakes, in stark contrast to previous studies with enculturated apes. These data suggest that flake manufacture and use is outside of our tested group of captive chimpanzees’ individual and social learning repertoires. It also suggests that high levels of enculturation alongside human demonstrations (and/or training) may be required before captive chimpanzees can develop this behaviour.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

Naïve, adult, captive chimpanzees do not socially learn how to make and use sharp stone tools

Bandini,

Tennie

2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lithic analysis protocols follow Proffitt et al [50]. The technological diversity of the lithic assemblages recovered from ALP was published by the authors in [50]. As such, the analysis presented here focuses on describing landscape variation in the material signature of nut cracking at the assemblage scale.…”

Section: Characterization Of Stone Assemblagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the variation in raw material properties across the study area produces a diverse archaeological record ranging from an abundance of fragments to assemblages containing a large proportion of accidentally produced flakes and flaked royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsif J. R. Soc. Interface 20: 20230118 pieces [50]. Environment assessments show that the distribution of palm trees varies, providing an opportunity to investigate how landscape-scale variation in raw material quality and resource availability influences the formation of a material record.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergent technological variation in archaeological landscapes: a primate perspective

Reeves

Proffitt

Malaivijitnond

et al. 2023

J. R. Soc. Interface.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archaeological evidence informs our understanding of the evolution of hominin behaviour. Such evidence is traditionally used to reconstruct hominin activities and intentions. In the Plio-Pleistocene, the presence or absence of specific tools and variation in artefact density is often used to infer foraging strategies, cognitive traits and functional activities. However, the Plio-Pleistocene archaeological record is known to be time-averaged and forms through the aggregation of repeated behavioural events over time. Thus, archaeological patterns do not reflect discrete episodes of activity, but rather the interaction of behaviour with environmental factors over time. However, little is known about how such interactions produce archaeological variation diversity. Primate archaeology can help address this research gap by providing the opportunity to observe how behaviour produces material patterns in a natural setting. This study, thus, examines how varying the material properties of stone and resource availability influence the artefactual signature of nut-cracking in a population of long-tailed macaques from Lobi Bay, Yao Noi island, Thailand. Results show that these interactions can produce a structured and diverse material signature in terms of artefact density and frequency of specific artefact types. These findings demonstrate how material patterns can emerge from long-term interactions between behaviour and environmental factors.

show abstract

“…Based on the conceptual framework that we provide in the following, we will be able to more accurately determine the differences between classical tools and modern tools, and outline specific research questions addressing this issue. Before we come to this, another critical point remains to be addressed: Regarding Condition 3, the premise of purposefulness (i.e., goal-directedness) is fundamental, yet not easy to prove, because individuals can inadvertently bring about distal effects by tool manipulation, without having strived for this action goal (Seed and Byrne, 2010;Proffitt et al, 2023). Such "accidental" outcomes do not qualify as tool use.…”

Section: Defining Tools and Tool Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Tool mastering today – an interdisciplinary perspective

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tools have coined human life, living conditions, and culture. Recognizing the cognitive architecture underlying tool use would allow us to comprehend its evolution, development, and physiological basis. However, the cognitive underpinnings of tool mastering remain little understood in spite of long-time research in neuroscientific, psychological, behavioral and technological fields. Moreover, the recent transition of tool use to the digital domain poses new challenges for explaining the underlying processes. In this interdisciplinary review, we propose three building blocks of tool mastering: (A) perceptual and motor abilities integrate to tool manipulation knowledge, (B) perceptual and cognitive abilities to functional tool knowledge, and (C) motor and cognitive abilities to means-end knowledge about tool use. This framework allows for integrating and structuring research findings and theoretical assumptions regarding the functional architecture of tool mastering via behavior in humans and non-human primates, brain networks, as well as computational and robotic models. An interdisciplinary perspective also helps to identify open questions and to inspire innovative research approaches. The framework can be applied to studies on the transition from classical to modern, non-mechanical tools and from analogue to digital user-tool interactions in virtual reality, which come with increased functional opacity and sensorimotor decoupling between tool user, tool, and target. By working towards an integrative theory on the cognitive architecture of the use of tools and technological assistants, this review aims at stimulating future interdisciplinary research avenues.

show abstract

Wild macaques challenge the origin of intentional tool production

Cited by 14 publications

References 78 publications

Naïve, adult, captive chimpanzees do not socially learn how to make and use sharp stone tools

Naïve, adult, captive chimpanzees do not socially learn how to make and use sharp stone tools

Emergent technological variation in archaeological landscapes: a primate perspective

Tool mastering today – an interdisciplinary perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About