Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28740211›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Digging up food: excavation stone tool use by wild capuchin monkeys.

Tiago Falótico, José O Siqueira, Eduardo B Ottoni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Ontogenetic Changes in Feeding Behaviors in Tufted Capuchins.American journal of biological anthropology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Earliest evidence of primate captivity and translocation supports gift diplomacy between Teotihuacan and the Maya.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tiago FalóticoDept. of Experimental Psychology - Institute of Psychology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. tfalotico@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-0638-1989
José O SiqueiraDept. of Experimental Psychology - Institute of Psychology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Eduardo B OttoniDept. of Experimental Psychology - Institute of Psychology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Capuchin monkeys at Serra da Capivara National Park (SCNP) usually forage on the ground for roots and fossorial arthropods, digging primarily with their hands but also using stone tools to loosen the soil and aid the digging process. Here we describe the stone tools used for digging by two groups of capuchins on SCNP. Both groups used tools while digging three main food resources: Thiloa glaucocarpa tubers, Ocotea sp roots, and trapdoor spiders. One explanation for the occurrence of tool use in primates is the "necessity hypothesis", which states that the main function of tool use is to obtain fallback food. We tested for this, but only found a positive correlation between plant food availability and the frequency of stone tools' use. Thus, our data do not support the fallback food hypothesis for the use of tools to access burrowed resources.

Indexed as

ArthropodsPlant RootsAnimalsCebusEatingFemaleFood SupplyMaleTool Use Behavior

Identifiers

PMID28740211
PMCPMC5524703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.