ArticlePrimates; journal of primatology2023
No food left behind: foraging route choices among free-ranging Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata) in a multi-destination array at the Awajishima Monkey Center, Japan.
Article in Primates; journal of primatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sleeping site use of François' langurs (Trachypithecus francoisi) inhabiting limestone forest of Nonggang, southwest China: the importance of foraging efficiency.Primates; journal of primatology · 2025Article
- Challenging the contest vs. scramble dichotomy in social competition: mixed conditions allow disparately ranked monkeys to get equivalent food but experiencing more competition still leads to risk-averse decisions.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Choosing the best way: how wild common marmosets travel to efficiently exploit resources.Animal cognition · 2024Article
- Mild movement sequence repetition in five primate species and evidence for a taxonomic divide in cognitive mechanisms.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Animals must make route choices every day when moving through their habitat while foraging. Choosing an optimal route can be cognitively costly, and primates and other animals have been shown to use simple heuristics, "rules of thumb", to make foraging route choices. We investigated the potential use of heuristics among foraging free-ranging Japanese monkeys (Macaca fuscata) during solitary foraging trials. We also investigated the potential influence of individual variables (age and sex) and social variables (presence in the central group, presence of potential inter- and intraspecific competitors), on the use of heuristics, route length and trial time. We used a multi-destination foraging experiment with 6 platforms in a (4 m × 8 m) Z-array, completed by 29 Japanese macaques in 155 runs at the Awajishima Monkey Center in Japan. Our results showed that the macaques chose routes consistent with heuristics (e.g. nearest neighbour heuristic 19.4%, convex hull heuristic 4.5%) and selected optimal routes (shortest path in 23.9% of the trials). We also identified a potential new heuristic that was used most frequently, that we termed the "sweep heuristic" (27.1% of trials), which we interpreted as a strategy to deal with competitive foraging trade-offs - choosing routes to prioritize not leaving isolated food pieces behind. Age was significantly related to trial time; juvenile macaques were faster than adults and young adults, using speed to gain access to resources. Solitary trials with conspecifics present took significantly longer routes. Our results suggest that contextual factors led to variation in Japanese macaque decision-making, and we suggest that the preferential use of a sweep heuristic may have been a response to high intragroup competition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.