ArticleScientific reports2024
Tool skill impacts the archaeological evidence across technological primates.
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.
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.
- Peak pressure experienced by the human hand during suspension and vertical climbing.Biology open · 2026Article
- Stone tool use in a new population of semi-free-ranging robust capuchins (Sapajus spp.) at Monkeyland Primate Sanctuary, South Africa.Primates; journal of primatology · 2026Article
- Camera Traps Document Infant Corpse Carrying Behaviour in Multiple Unhabituated Chimpanzee Populations.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Reliable long-term individual variation in wild chimpanzee technological efficiency.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
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
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.