Animal Cognition

, 14:775 | Cite as

Tool choice on the basis of rigidity in capuchin monkeys

  • Héctor Marín Manrique
  • Gloria Sabbatini
  • Josep Call
  • Elisabetta Visalberghi
Original Paper

Abstract

Wild capuchin monkeys select stone tools to crack open nuts on the basis of their weight and friability, two non-visual functional properties. Here, we investigated whether they would select new stick-like tools on the basis of their rigidity. In Experiment 1, subjects faced an out-of-reach reward and a choice of three unfamiliar tools differing in color, diameter, material, and rigidity. In order to retrieve the reward, capuchins needed to select the rigid tool exemplar. Capuchins gathered information regarding tools’ pliability either by (1) manipulating the tools themselves (manipulation condition), (2) observing a human demonstrator repeatedly bending the tools (observation condition), or (3) seeing the tools placed on a platform without any manipulation taking place (visual static condition). Subjects selected the rigid tool above chance levels in both the manipulation and observation conditions, but not in the visual static condition. In Experiment 2, subjects needed to select and use a flexible tool to access a liquid reward (as opposed to the rigid tool, as in previous experiment). Again, capuchins selected above chance levels the appropriate tool (i.e., flexible), thus demonstrating a good appreciation of the relation between the tool properties and the task requirements.

Keywords

Tool-use Object properties Problem solving Primates Monkeys 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Maria Elena Miletto for her help during the experiments, Noemi Spagnoletti for the photograph in Fig. 1, and Anna Bordonali for her help in calculating inter-observer reliability. We are also grateful to the Bioparco Foundation for hosting the laboratory where the experiment was carried out, G. Fidanza and our keepers M. Bianchi and S. Catarinacci. We acknowledge financial support by the grant IM-CleVeR (Intrinsically Motivated Cumulative Learning Versatile Robots), financed by the FP7 of the European Commission (Grant agreement n. 231722). Héctor M. Manrique was supported by an Exchange Grant within the framework of the European Science Foundation Research Networking Program on “Evolution of Social Cognition: Comparisons and integration across a wide range of human and non-human species”.

References

  1. Anderson JR, Henneman MC (1994) Solutions to a tool-use problem in a pair of Cebus apella. Mammalia 58:351–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brockmann HJ (1985) Tool use in digger wasps (Hymenoptera: Sphecinae). Psyche 92:309–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2002) Tool Selectivity in a non-primate, the new caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides). Anim Cogn 5:71–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2004) Selection of tool diameter by new caledonian crows Corvus moneduloides. Anim Cogn 7:121–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans TA, Westergaard GC (2004) Discrimination of functionally appropriate and inappropriate throwing tools in captive tufted capuchins (Cebus Apella). Anim Cogn 7:255–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fragaszy D, Deputte B, Johnson Cooper E, Colbert-White EN, Hemery C (2011) When and how well can human-socialized capuchins match actions demonstrated by a familiar human? Am J Primatol. doi:10.1002/ajp.20941
  7. Frasgaszy DM, Visalberghi E, Fedigan LM (2004) The complete capuchin: the biology of the genus Cebus. Cambridge University Press, UKGoogle Scholar
  8. Furlong EE, Boose KJ, Boysen ST (2008) Raking it in: the impact of enculturation on chimpanzee tool use. Anim Cogn 11:83–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gambetta B (2010) Il ragionamento analogico in “Cebus apella” (Analogical reasoning in “Cebus apella”). Master thesis, Sapienza University of Rome, RomeGoogle Scholar
  10. Holzhaider JC, Hunt GR, Campbell VM, Gray RD (2008) Do wild new caledonian crows (Corvus moneduloides) attend to the functional properties of their tools? Anim Cogn 11:243–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mannu M, Ottoni EB (2009) The enhanced tool-kit of two groups of wild bearded capuchin monkeys in the Caatinga: tool making, associative use, and secondary tools. Am J Primatol 71:242–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Manrique HM, Gross A, Call J (2010) Great apes select tools on the basis of their rigidity. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 36(4):409–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Povinelli DJ (2000) Folk physics for apes: the chimpanzee’s theory of how the world works. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Santos LR, Pearson HM, Spaepen GM, Tsao F, Hauser MD (2006) Probing the limits of tool competence: experiments with two non-tool-using species (Cercopithecus aethiops and Saguinus oedipus). Anim Cogn 9:94–109PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sanz C, Morgan D, Gulick S (2004) New insights into chimpanzees, tools, and termites from the Congo Basin. Am Nat 164:567–581PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schrauf C, Huber L, Visalberghi E (2008) Do capuchin monkeys use weight to select hammer tools? Anim Cogn 11:413–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Seed A, Byrne R (2011) Animal tool-use. Curr Biol 20:1067–1068Google Scholar
  18. Spagnoletti N, Visalberghi E, Ottoni E, Izar P, Fragaszy D (2011) Stone tool use by adult wild bearded capuchin monkeys (Cebus libidinosus). Frequency, efficiency and tool selectivity. J Hum Evol. doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2011.02.010
  19. Tebbich S, Taborsky M, Fessl B, Dvorak M (2002) The ecology of tool use in the woodpecker finch (Cactospiza pallida). Ecol Lett 5:656–664CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Thouless CR, Fanshawe JH, Bertram BCR (1989) Egyptian Vultures Neophron percnopterus and Ostrich Struthio camelus eggs: the origins of stone-throwing behaviour. Ibis 131:9–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tomasello M, Call J (1997) Primate cognition. Oxford University Press, NY, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Visalberghi E (1993) Tool use in a South American monkey species. An overview of characteristics and limits of tool use in Cebus apella. In: Berthelet A, Chavaillon J (eds) Tool use in human and nonhuman primates. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 119–131Google Scholar
  23. Visalberghi E, Fragaszy D (2006) What is challenging about tool use? The capuchins’ perspective. In: Wasserman EA, Zentall TR (eds) Comparative cognition: experimental explorations of animal intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 529–552Google Scholar
  24. Visalberghi E, Limongelli L (1994) Lack of comprehension of cause-effect relations in tool-using capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 108:15–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Visalberghi E, Trinca L (1989) Tool use in capuchin monkeys: distinguishing between performing and understanding. Primates 30:511–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Visalberghi E, Addessi E, Truppa V, Spagnoletti N, Ottoni E, Izar P, Fragaszy D (2009) Selection of effective stone tools by wild bearded capuchin monkeys. Curr Biol 19:213–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Walkup KR, Shumaker RW, Pruetz JD (2010) Orangutans (Pongo spp.) may prefer tools with rigid properties to flimsy tools. J Comp Psychol 124(4):351–355PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Héctor Marín Manrique
    • 1
  • Gloria Sabbatini
    • 2
  • Josep Call
    • 1
  • Elisabetta Visalberghi
    • 2
  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary AnthropologyLeipzigGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies of CNRRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations