Perspectives on object manipulation and action grammar for percussive actions in primates

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.

Sequence Order in the Range 1 to 19 by Chimpanzees on a Touchscreen Task: Processing Two-Digit Arabic Numerals

The sequence of Arabic numerals from 1 to 19 was taught to six chimpanzees, three pairs of mother and child. Each chimpanzee participant sat facing a touchscreen on which the numerals appeared in random positions within an imaginary 5-by-8 matrix. They had to touch the numerals in ascending order. Baseline training involved touching the adjacent numerals from 1 to X or from the numeral X to 19. Systematic tests revealed the following results: (1) The range 1 to 9 was easier than 1 to 19. (2) Adjacent numerals were easier than nonadjacent ones. (3) The "masking" (memory task) caused deterioration of performance. All these factors depended on the number of numerals simultaneously presented on the screen. A chimpanzee named Pal mastered the skill of ordering two-digit numerals with 100% accuracy. Human participants were tested in the same experiment with the same procedure. Both species showed relative difficulty in handling two-digit numerals. Global-local information processing is known to be different between humans and other primates. The assessment of chimpanzee performance and comparison with humans were discussed in terms of the possible difference in the global-local dual information processing of two-digit numerals.

Call combinations in chimpanzees: a social tool?

A growing body of evidence suggests the capacity for animals to combine calls into larger communicative structures is more common than previously assumed. Despite its cross-taxa prevalence, little is known regarding the evolutionary pressures driving such combinatorial abilities. One dominant hypothesis posits that social complexity and vocal complexity are linked, with changes in social structuring (e.g., group size) driving the emergence of ever-more complex vocal abilities, such as call sequencing. In this paper, we tested this hypothesis through investigating combinatoriality in the vocal system of the highly social chimpanzee. Specifically, we predicted combinatoriality to be more common in socially-driven contexts and in females and lower-ranked males (socially challenging contexts and socially challenged individuals respectively). Firstly, through applying methods from computational linguistics (i.e., collocation analyses), we built an objective repertoire of combinatorial structures in this species. Second, we investigated what potential factors influenced call combination production. We show that combinatoriality is predominant in 1) social contexts vs. non-social contexts, 2) females vs. males, and 3) negatively correlates with male rank. Together, these results suggest one function of combinatoriality in chimpanzees may be to help individuals navigate their dynamic social world. More generally, we argue these findings provide support for the hypothesized link between social and vocal complexity and can provide insight into the evolution of our own highly combinatorial communication system, language.

Hierarchical object combination and tool use in the great apes and human children

Object manipulation can be used as a comparative scale of cognitive development among primates, including humans. Combinatory object manipulation is a precursor of tool-using behavior that indicates material intelligence in primates. However, developmental data on it regarding the great apes other than chimpanzees is insufficient. We conducted a longitudinal investigation of humans and chimpanzees as well as a cross-sectional examination of other great-ape infants (two bonobos, three gorillas, and four orangutans) in captive settings by using two kinds of tasks that required either inserting or stacking combinatory action. The four species of great apes and humans demonstrated both types of combinatory object manipulation during infancy. However, the order of development in different types of combinatory object manipulations varied among the great apes. Furthermore, we applied a nesting-cup task to examine the hierarchical complexity in the combinatory strategies of human children and adult chimpanzees. Both of them exhibited highly hierarchical combinations in the nesting-cup task and employed the subassembly strategy, indicating that an action merge may exist not only in human children but also in adult chimpanzees. The results were discussed with reviews of the tool-use literature from the wild great apes. The early acquisition of an inserting action in the chimpanzees may explain the tool utilization commonality reported in wild chimpanzees. The combinatory object manipulation may have worked as an external enhancer to achieve an additional hierarchical complexity in cognition and behavior, eventually leading humans to develop a language system.

Beyond language: The unspoken sensory-motor representation of the tongue in non-primates, non-human and human primates

The English idiom "on the tip of my tongue" commonly acknowledges that something is known, but it cannot be immediately brought to mind. This phrase accurately describes sensorimotor functions of the tongue, which are fundamental for many tongue-related behaviors (e.g., speech), but often neglected by scientific research. Here, we review a wide range of studies conducted on non-primates, non-human and human primates with the aim of providing a comprehensive description of the cortical representation of the tongue's somatosensory inputs and motor outputs across different phylogenetic domains. First, we summarize how the properties of passive non-noxious mechanical stimuli are encoded in the putative somatosensory tongue area, which has a conserved location in the ventral portion of the somatosensory cortex across mammals. Second, we review how complex self-generated actions involving the tongue are represented in more anterior regions of the putative somato-motor tongue area. Finally, we describe multisensory response properties of the primate and non-primate tongue area by also defining how the cytoarchitecture of this area is affected by experience and deafferentation.

Naïve, unenculturated chimpanzees fail to make and use flaked stone tools

Background: Despite substantial research on early hominin lithic technologies, the learning mechanisms underlying flake manufacture and use are contested. To draw phylogenetic inferences on the potential cognitive processes underlying the acquisition of both of these abilities in early hominins, we investigated if and how one of our closest living relatives, chimpanzees ( Pan troglodytes), could learn to make and use flakes. Methods: Across several experimental conditions, we tested eleven task-naïve chimpanzees (unenculturated n=8, unknown status n=3) from two independent populations for their abilities to spontaneously make and subsequently use flakes as well as to use flakes made by a human experimenter. Results: Despite the fact that the chimpanzees seemed to understand the requirements of the task, were sufficiently motivated and had ample opportunities to develop the target behaviours, none of the chimpanzees tested made or used flakes in any of the experimental conditions. Conclusions: These results differ from all previous ape flaking experiments, which found flake manufacture and use in bonobos and one orangutan. However, these earlier studies tested human-enculturated apes and provided test subjects with flake making and using demonstrations. The contrast between these earlier positive findings and our negative findings (despite using a much larger sample size) suggests that enculturation and/or demonstrations may be necessary for chimpanzees to acquire these abilities. The data obtained in this study are consistent with the hypothesis that flake manufacture and use might have evolved in the hominin lineage after the split between Homo and Pan 7 million years ago, a scenario further supported by the initial lack of flaked stone tools in the archaeological record after this split. We discuss possible evolutionary scenarios for flake manufacture and use in both non-hominin and hominin lineages.

Object sorting into a two-dimensional array in humans and chimpanzees

Object-sorting tasks have been used as a means of assessing the cognitive development of humans. In order to investigate cognitive development from a comparative perspective, an object-sorting task was conducted in a longitudinal face-to-face situation involving three juvenile/adolescent chimpanzees (7-9 years old) and 17 children (2-5 years old). The subjects were requested to place nine blocks of different categories (distinguished by three colors and three shapes) into the cells of a box arrayed in a three-by-three pattern. Chimpanzees showed complete or partial categorical sorting in 24-43% of pre-cued trials. The youngest children had difficulty in completing a trial by placing all nine blocks into the box. Humans older than 2 years succeeded in making a one-to-one correspondence by placing a block in each cell, while the end-state pattern remained random. The children gradually increased their rate of categorical sorting, where objects of one category were placed in the same row/column; this tendency peaked at 4 years of age. Above this age, the humans spontaneously shifted their sorting strategy to make a completely even configuration (resulting in a Latin square), which may be more cognitively demanding than categorical sorting. While chimpanzees and older children used both color and shape cues for categorical sorting, younger humans preferred to use shape cues. The results of the present study show fundamental similarities between humans and chimpanzees at the basic level of categorical sorting, which indicates that some autonomous rules are applied during object manipulation.

Assessing the manipulative potentials of monkeys, apes and humans from hand proportions: implications for hand evolution

The hand structure possesses a greater potential for performing manipulative skills than is typically observed, whether in humans or non-human anthropoids. However, a precise assessment of the potential manipulative skills of hands has been challenging, which hampers our understanding of the evolution of manipulative abilities in anthropoid hands. Here, we establish a functional model to quantitatively infer the manipulative potentials of anthropoid hands based on hand proportions. Our results reveal a large disparity of manipulative potentials among anthropoid hands. From the aspect of hand proportions, the human hand has the best manipulative potential among anthropoids. However, the species with a manipulative potential closer to that of humans are not our nearest relatives, chimpanzees, but rather, are certain monkey species. In combination with the phylogenetically informed morphometric analyses, our results suggest that the morphological changes of non-human anthropoid hands did not coevolve with the brain to facilitate the manipulative ability during the evolutionary process, although the manipulative ability is a survival skill. The changes in non-human anthropoid hands may have more likely evolved under selective pressure for locomotion than manipulation.

Do chimpanzees anticipate an object's weight? A field experiment on the kinematics of hammer-lifting movements in the nut-cracking Taï chimpanzees

When humans are about to manipulate an object, our brains use visual cues to recall an internal representation to predict its weight and scale the lifting force accordingly. Such a long-term force profile, formed through repeated experiences with similar objects, has been proposed to improve manipulative performance. Skillful object manipulation is crucial for many animals, particularly those that rely on tools for foraging. However, despite enduring interest in tool use in non-human animals, there has been very little investigation of their ability to form an expectation about an object's weight. In this study, we tested whether wild chimpanzees use long-term force profiles to anticipate the weight of a nut-cracking hammer from its size. To this end, we conducted a field experiment presenting chimpanzees with natural wooden hammers and artificially hollowed, lighter hammers of the same size and external appearance. We used calibrated videos from camera traps to extract kinematic parameters of lifting movements. We found that, when lacking previous experience, chimpanzees lifted hollowed hammers with a higher acceleration than natural hammers (overshoot effect). After using a hammer to crack open one nut, chimpanzees tuned down the lifting acceleration for the hollowed hammers, but continued lifting natural hammers with the same acceleration. Our results show that chimpanzees anticipate the weight of an object using long-term force profiles and suggest that, similarly to humans, they use internal representations of weight to plan their lifting movements.

Extraction of honey from underground bee nests by central African chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) in Loango National Park, Gabon: Techniques and individual differences

A detailed analysis of tool use behaviors can disclose the underlying cognitive traits of the users. We investigated the technique used by wild chimpanzees to extract the underground nests of stingless bees (Meliplebeia lendliana), which represent a hard-to-reach resource given their highly undetectable location. Using remote-sensor camera trap footage, we analyzed 151 visits to 50 different bee nests by 18 adult chimpanzees of both sexes. We quantified the degree of complexity and flexibility of this technique by looking at the behavioral repertoire and at its structural organization. We used Generalized Linear Mixed Models to test whether individuals differed in their action repertoire sizes and in their action sequencing patterns, as well as in their preferences of use of different behavioral elements (namely, actions, and grip types). We found that subjects showed non-randomly organized sequences of actions and that the occurrence of certain actions was predicted by the type of the previous action in the sequences. Subjects did not differ in their repertoire sizes, and all used extractive actions involving tools more often than manual digging. As for the type of grip employed, the grip involving the coordinated use of hands and feet together was most frequently used by all subjects when perforating, and we detected significant individual preferences in this domain. Overall, we describe a highly complex and flexible extractive technique, and propose the existence of inter-individual variation in it. We discuss our results in the light of the evolution of higher cognitive abilities in the human lineage.

Nut Cracking Tools Used by Captive Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and Their Comparison with Early Stone Age Percussive Artefacts from Olduvai Gorge

We present the results of a series of experiments at the Kumamoto Sanctuary in Japan, in which captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) performed several nut cracking sessions using raw materials from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. We examined captive chimpanzee pounding tools using a combination of technological analysis, use-wear distribution, and micro-wear analysis. Our results show specific patterns of use-wear distribution across the active surfaces of pounding tools, which reveal some similarities with traces on archaeological percussive objects from the Early Stone Age, and are consistent with traces on other experimental pounding tools used by modern humans. The approach used in this study may help to stablish a framework with which to interpret archaeological assemblages and improve understanding of use-wear formation processes on pounding tools used by chimpanzees. This study represents the first direct comparison of chimpanzee pounding tools and archaeological material, and thus may contribute to a better understanding of hominin percussive activities.

Percussive technology in human evolution: an introduction to a comparative approach in fossil and living primates

Percussive technology is part of the behavioural suite of several fossil and living primates. Stone Age ancestors used lithic artefacts in pounding activities, which could have been most important in the earliest stages of stone working. This has relevant evolutionary implications, as other primates such as chimpanzees and some monkeys use stone hammer-and-anvil combinations to crack hard-shelled foodstuffs. Parallels between primate percussive technologies and early archaeological sites need to be further explored in order to assess the emergence of technological behaviour in our evolutionary line, and firmly establish bridges between Primatology and Archaeology. What are the anatomical, cognitive and ecological constraints of percussive technology? How common are percussive activities in the Stone Age and among living primates? What is their functional significance? How similar are archaeological percussive tools and those made by non-human primates? This issue of Phil. Trans. addresses some of these questions by presenting case studies with a wide chronological, geographical and disciplinary coverage. The studies presented here cover studies of Brazilian capuchins, captive chimpanzees and chimpanzees in the wild, research on the use of percussive technology among modern humans and recent hunter-gatherers in Australia, the Near East and Europe, and archaeological examples of this behaviour from a million years ago to the Holocene. In summary, the breadth and depth of research compiled here should make this issue of Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, a landmark step forward towards a better understanding of percussive technology, a unique behaviour shared by some modern and fossil primates.

Percussive tool use by Taï Western chimpanzees and Fazenda Boa Vista bearded capuchin monkeys: a comparison

Percussive tool use holds special interest for scientists concerned with human origins. We summarize the findings from two field sites, Taï and Fazenda Boa Vista, where percussive tool use by chimpanzees and bearded capuchins, respectively, has been extensively investigated. We describe the ecological settings in which nut-cracking occurs and focus on four aspects of nut-cracking that have important cognitive implications, namely selection of tools, tool transport, tool modification and modulation of actions to reach the goal of cracking the nut. We comment on similarities and differences in behaviour and consider whether the observed differences reflect ecological, morphological, social and/or cognitive factors. Both species are sensitive to physical properties of tools, adjust their selection of hammers conditionally to the resistance of the nuts and to transport distance, and modulate the energy of their strikes under some conditions. However, chimpanzees transport hammers more frequently and for longer distances, take into account a higher number of combinations of variables and occasionally intentionally modify tools. A parsimonious interpretation of our findings is that morphological, ecological and social factors account for the observed differences. Confirmation of plausible cognitive differences in nut-cracking requires data not yet available.