21
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Wild Bearded Capuchin Monkeys ( Sapajus libidinosus) Strategically Place Nuts in a Stable Position during Nut-Cracking

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Humans can use hand tools smoothly and effectively in varying circumstances; in other words, skillfully. A few other species of primates crack encased foods using hammer tools and anvils. Are they skilled? Positioning the food on the anvil so that it does not fall off when struck is a component of skilled cracking. We discovered that bearded capuchin monkeys deliberately place palm nuts in a relatively stable position on the anvil before striking them. In the first experiment, we marked the meridians of palm nuts where they stopped when rolled on a flat surface (“Stop meridian”). We videotaped monkeys as they cracked these nuts on an anvil. In playback we coded the position of the Stop meridian prior to each strike. Monkeys typically knocked the nuts on the anvil a few times before releasing them in a pit. They positioned the nuts so that the Stop meridian was within 30 degrees of vertical with respect to gravity more often than expected, and the nuts rarely moved after the monkeys released them. In the second experiment, 14 blindfolded people (7 men) asked to position marked nuts on an anvil as if to crack them reliably placed them with the Stop meridian in the same position as the monkeys did. In the third experiment, two people judged that palm nuts are most bilaterally symmetric along a meridian on, or close to, the Stop meridian. Thus the monkeys reliably placed the more symmetrical side of the nuts against the side of the pit, and the nuts reliably remained stationary when released. Monkeys apparently used information gained from knocking the nut to achieve this position. Thus, monkeys place the nuts skillfully, strategically managing the fit between the variable nuts and pits in the anvil, and skilled placement depends upon information generated by manual action.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          Human Hand Function

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Selection of effective stone tools by wild bearded capuchin monkeys.

            Appreciation of objects' affordances and planning is a hallmark of human technology. Archeological evidence suggests that Pliocene hominins selected raw material for tool making [1, 2]. Stone pounding has been considered a precursor to tool making [3, 4], and tool use by living primates provides insight into the origins of material selection by human ancestors. No study has experimentally investigated selectivity of stone tools in wild animals, although chimpanzees appear to select stones according to properties of different nut species [5, 6]. We recently discovered that wild capuchins with terrestrial habits [7] use hammers to crack open nuts on anvils [8-10]. As for chimpanzees, examination of anvil sites suggests stone selectivity [11], but indirect evidence cannot prove it. Here, we demonstrate that capuchins, which last shared a common ancestor with humans 35 million years ago, faced with stones differing in functional features (friability and weight) choose, transport, and use the effective stone to crack nuts. Moreover, when weight cannot be judged by visual attributes, capuchins act to gain information to guide their selection. Thus, planning actions and intentional selection of tools is within the ken of monkeys and similar to the tool activities of hominins and apes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Stone tool use by adult wild bearded capuchin monkeys (Cebus libidinosus). Frequency, efficiency and tool selectivity.

              Chimpanzees have been the traditional referential models for investigating human evolution and stone tool use by hominins. We enlarge this comparative scenario by describing normative use of hammer stones and anvils in two wild groups of bearded capuchin monkeys (Cebus libidinosus) over one year. We found that most of the individuals habitually use stones and anvils to crack nuts and other encased food items. Further, we found that in adults (1) males use stone tools more frequently than females, (2) males crack high resistance nuts more frequently than females, (3) efficiency at opening a food by percussive tool use varies according to the resistance of the encased food, (4) heavier individuals are more efficient at cracking high resistant nuts than smaller individuals, and (5) to crack open encased foods, both sexes select hammer stones on the basis of material and weight. These findings confirm and extend previous experimental evidence concerning tool selectivity in wild capuchin monkeys (Visalberghi et al., 2009b; Fragaszy et al., 2010b). Male capuchins use tools more frequently than females and body mass is the best predictor of efficiency, but the sexes do not differ in terms of efficiency. We argue that the contrasting pattern of sex differences in capuchins compared with chimpanzees, in which females use tools more frequently and more skillfully than males, may have arisen from the degree of sexual dimorphism in body size of the two species, which is larger in capuchins than in chimpanzees. Our findings show the importance of taking sex and body mass into account as separate variables to assess their role in tool use. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2013
                27 February 2013
                : 8
                : 2
                : e56182
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, United States of America
                [2 ]Department of Anatomy, Kansas City University of Medicine and Biosciences, Kansas City, Missouri, United States of America
                [3 ]Unit of Cognitive Primatology, Institute of Science and Technology of Cognition, National Research Council, Rome, Italy
                University of Florence, Italy
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: DF BW EV. Performed the experiments: QL DF EV. Analyzed the data: CWB AA DF QL. Wrote the paper: DF.

                [¤]

                Current address: University of North Carolina-Pembroke, Department of Psychology, Pembroke, North Carolina

                Article
                PONE-D-12-28350
                10.1371/journal.pone.0056182
                3584076
                23460793
                1910f96f-1130-4e76-b606-0bdd0f8dd612
                Copyright @ 2013

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 16 September 2012
                : 9 January 2013
                Page count
                Pages: 9
                Funding
                This study was funded by the National Geographic Society, The LSB Leakey Foundation, and The University of Georgia. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology
                Evolutionary Biology
                Animal Behavior
                Neuroscience
                Animal Cognition
                Sensory Perception
                Social and Behavioral Sciences
                Anthropology
                Biological Anthropology
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Attention (Behavior)
                Habits
                Cognitive Psychology
                Problem Solving
                Experimental Psychology
                Sensory Perception

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article