On the tool use behavior of the bonobo-chimpanzee last common ancestor, and the origins of hominine stone tool use

Linking primatology and archaeology: The transversality of stone percussive behaviors

Since the launch of the Journal of Human Evolution fifty years ago, the archaeology of human origins and the evolution of culture have witnessed major breakthroughs with the identification of several new archaeological sites whose chronology has been slowly pushed back until the discovery of the earliest evidence of stone tool making at Lomekwi 3 (West Turkana, Kenya), at 3.3 Ma. Parallel to these discoveries, the study of wild primates, especially chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), allowed the development of models to understand key aspects of the behavior of extinct hominin species. Indeed, chimpanzees possess an impressive diversity of tool-aided foraging behaviors, demonstrating that technology (and culture) is not exclusive to humans. Additionally, current research has also shown that wild capuchin monkeys (Sapajus libidinosus) and long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) also rely on stone percussive foraging behaviors. The investigation of these primates is boosting new interpretative models to understand the origins of stone flaking and the archaeological signature left by these primates. This review aims to present an examination of the state-of-the-art and the current advances made in the study of the earliest hominin technology and primate percussive behaviors. Overall, we argue that while it has been shown that extant primates can generate unintentional flakes, early hominins exhibited skills in the production and use of flakes not identified in primates. Nonetheless, we stand up to continue developing interdisciplinary approaches (i.e., primate archaeology) to study extant primates, as these endeavors are essential to move forward toward a detailed understanding of the technological foraging behaviors beyond the genus Homo. Finally, we discuss future challenges for the study of the emergence of stone technology.

Tool use behavior in three wild bonobo communities at Kokolopori

Comparative studies on tool technologies in extant primates, especially in our closest living relatives, offer a window into the evolutionary foundations of tool use in hominins. Whereas chimpanzee tool technology is well studied across populations, the scarcity of described tool technology in wild populations of our other closest living relative, the bonobo, is a mystery. Here we provide a first report of the tool use repertoire of the Kokolopori bonobos and describe in detail the use of leaf-umbrellas during rainfall, with the aim to improve our knowledge of bonobo tool use capacity in the wild. The tool use repertoire of the Kokolopori bonobos was most similar to that of the nearby population of Wamba and comprised eight behaviors, none in a foraging context. Further, over a 6-month period we documented 44 instances of leaf-umbrella use by 22 individuals from three communities, suggesting that this behavior is habitual. Most leaf-umbrella tool users were adult females, and we observed a nonadult using a leaf-umbrella on only a single occasion. While the study and theory of tool technologies is often based on the use of tools in foraging tasks, tool use in bonobos typically occurs in nonforaging contexts across populations. Therefore, incorporating both foraging and nonforaging contexts into our theoretical framework is essential if we wish to advance our understanding of the evolutionary trajectories of tool technology in humans.

The ontogeny of termite gathering among chimpanzees in the Goualougo Triangle, Republic of Congo

Objectives

Acquiring tool‐assisted foraging skills can potentially improve dietary quality and increase fitness for wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). In contrast to chimpanzees in East and West Africa, chimpanzees in the Congo Basin use tool sets and brush‐tipped fishing probes to gather termites. We investigated the ontogeny of these tool skills in chimpanzees of the Goualougo Triangle, Republic of Congo, and compared it to that for chimpanzees at Gombe, Tanzania. We assessed whether chimpanzees acquired simple tool behaviors and single tool use before more complex actions and sequential use of multiple tool types.

Materials and Methods

Using a longitudinal approach, we scored remote video footage to document the acquisition of termite‐gathering critical elements for 25 immature chimpanzees at Goualougo.

Results

All chimpanzees termite fished by 2.9 years but did not manufacture brush‐tipped probes until an average of 4.3 years. Acquisition of sequential tool use extended into juvenility and adolescence. While we did not detect significant sex differences, most critical elements except tool manufacture were acquired slightly earlier by females.

Discussion

These findings contrast with Gombe, where chimpanzees learn to both use and make fishing probes between ages 1.5–3.5 and acquire the complete task by age 5.5. Differences between sites could reflect tool material selectivity and design complexity, the challenge of sequential tool behaviors, and strength requirements of puncturing subterranean termite nests at Goualougo. These results illustrate how task complexity may influence the timing and sequence of skill acquisition, improving models of the ontogeny of tool behavior among early hominins who likely used complex, perishable technologies.

Hominid butchers and biting crocodiles in the African Plio-Pleistocene

The idea that early Australopithecus shaped stone tools to butcher large mammals before the emergence of Homo around 2 million years ago has excited both primatologists and archaeologists. Such claims depend on interpreting modifications found on the surfaces of fossil bones. Recent experiments involving the feeding of mammal carcasses to modern crocodiles have revealed that equifinality—the creation of similar products by different processes—is more important than previously appreciated by zooarchaeologists. Application of these findings to Ethiopian fossils casts doubt on claims for the earliest large mammal butchery and indicates the need for reassessment of all Oldowan-associated bone assemblages to determine the degree to which equifinality compromises earlier interpretations of hominid subsistence activities and their role in human evolution.

Zooarchaeologists have long relied on linear traces and pits found on the surfaces of ancient bones to infer ancient hominid behaviors such as slicing, chopping, and percussive actions during butchery of mammal carcasses. However, such claims about Plio–Pleistocene hominids rely mostly on very small assemblages of bony remains. Furthermore, recent experiments on trampling animals and biting crocodiles have shown each to be capable of producing mimics of such marks. This equifinality—the creation of similar products by different processes—makes deciphering early archaeological bone assemblages difficult. Bone modifications among Ethiopian Plio–Pleistocene hominid and faunal remains at Asa Issie, Maka, Hadar, and Bouri were reassessed in light of these findings. The results show that crocodiles were important modifiers of these bone assemblages. The relative roles of hominids, mammalian carnivores, and crocodiles in the formation of Oldowan zooarchaeological assemblages will only be accurately revealed by better bounding equifinality. Critical analysis within a consilience-based approach is identified as the pathway forward. More experimental studies and increased archaeological fieldwork aimed at generating adequate samples are now required.

Occasional, obligatory, and habitual stone tool use in hominin evolution

Archeologists have long assumed that earlier hominins were obligatory stone tool users. This assumption is deeply embedded in traditional ways of describing the lithic record. This paper argues that lithic evidence dating before 1.7 Ma reflects occasional stone tool use, much like that practiced by nonhuman primates except that it involved flaked-stone cutting tools. Evidence younger than 0.3 Ma is more congruent with obligatory stone tool use, like that among recent humans. The onset of habitual stone tool use at about 1.7 Ma appears correlated with increased hominin logistical mobility (carrying things). The onset of obligatory stone tool use after 0.3 Ma may be linked to the evolution of spoken language. Viewing the lithic evidence dating between 0.3-1.7 Ma as habitual stone tool use explains previously inexplicable aspects of the Early-Middle Pleistocene lithic record.

Preparation and use of varied natural tools for extractive foraging by bonobos (Pan Paniscus)

OBJECTIVES

The tool-assisted extractive foraging capabilities of captive (zoo) and semi-captive (sanctuary) bonobo (Pan paniscus) groups were compared to each other and to those known in wild chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) cultures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The bonobos were provided with natural raw materials and challenged with tasks not previously encountered, in experimental settings simulating natural contexts where resources requiring special retrieval efforts were hidden. They were shown that food was buried underground or inserted into long bone cavities, and left to tackle the tasks without further intervention.

RESULTS

The bonobos used modified branches and unmodified antlers or stones to dig under rocks and in the ground or to break bones to retrieve the food. Antlers, short sticks, long sticks, and rocks were effectively used as mattocks, daggers, levers, and shovels, respectively. One bonobo successively struck a long bone with an angular hammer stone, completely bisecting it longitudinally. Another bonobo modified long branches into spears and used them as attack weapons and barriers. Bonobos in the sanctuary, unlike those in the zoo, used tool sets to perform sequential actions.

DISCUSSION

The competent and diverse tool-assisted extractive foraging by the bonobos corroborates and complements the extensive information on similar tool use by chimpanzees, suggesting that such competence is a shared trait. Better performance by the sanctuary bonobos than the zoo group was probably due to differences in their cultural exposure and housing conditions. The bonobos' foraging techniques resembled some of those attributed to Oldowan hominins, implying that they can serve as referential models.