Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39019910›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Tool skill impacts the archaeological evidence across technological primates.

Lydia V Luncz, Nora E Slania, Katarina Almeida-Warren, Susana Carvalho, Tiago Falótico, Suchinda Malaivijitnond, Adrián Arroyo, Ignacio de la Torre, Tomos Proffitt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Lydia V Luncz *Technological Primates Research Group, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. Lydia_Luncz@eva.mpg.de.
Nora E Slania *Technological Primates Research Group, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Katarina Almeida-WarrenPrimate Models for Behavioural Evolution Lab, Institute of Human Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Susana CarvalhoPrimate Models for Behavioural Evolution Lab, Institute of Human Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Tiago FalóticoCapCult Project, Neotropical Primates Research Group, São Paulo, Brazil.
Suchinda MalaivijitnondNational Primate Research Center of Thailand, Chulalongkorn University, Saraburi, Bangkok, Thailand.
Adrián ArroyoSeminari d'Estudis i Recerques Prehistòriques (SERP), Institut d'Arqueologia de la Universitat de Barcelona (IAUB), Department of History and Archaeology, University of Barcelona, 08001, Barcelona, Spain.
Ignacio de la TorreInstituto de Historia, Spanish National Research Council-CSIC, Madrid, Spain.
Tomos ProffittTechnological Primates Research Group, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Deutscher Platz 6, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2018/01292-9Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia SFRH/BD/115085/2016Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación CEX2019-000945-MNational Geographic Society EC-399R-18The Leverhulme Trust ECF-2022-322
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The archaeological record offers insights into our evolutionary past by revealing ancient behaviour through stone and fossil remains. Percussive foraging is suggested to be particularly relevant for the emergence of tool-use in our lineage, yet early hominin percussive behaviours remain largely understudied compared to flaked technology. Stone tool-use of extant primates allows the simultaneous investigation of their artefacts and the associated behaviours. This is important for understanding the development of tool surface modification, and crucial for interpreting damage patterns in the archaeological record. Here, we compare the behaviour and the resulting material record across stone tool-using primates. We investigate the relationship of nut-cracking technique and stone tool modification across chimpanzees, capuchins, and long-tailed macaques by conducting standardized field experiments with comparable raw materials. We show that different techniques likely emerged in response to diverse nut hardness, leading to variation in foraging success across species. Our experiments further demonstrate a correlation between techniques and the intensity of visible percussive damage on the tools. Tools used with more precision and efficiency as demonstrated by macaques, show fewer use wear traces. This suggests that some percussive techniques may be less readily identified in the archaeological record.

Indexed as

ArchaeologyTool Use BehaviorAnimalsCebusFossilsMacacaPan troglodytesPrimatesField experimentsNut crackingPrimate cognitionPrimatesTool-useUse wear

Identifiers

PMID39019910
PMCPMC11255293

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.