» Articles » PMID: 32195057

Testing the Individual and Social Learning Abilities of Task-naïve Captive Chimpanzees () in a Nut-cracking Task

Overview
Journal PeerJ
Date 2020 Mar 21
PMID 32195057
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Nut-cracking is often cited as one of the most complex behaviours observed in wild chimpanzees. However, the cognitive mechanisms behind its acquisition are still debated. The current null hypothesis is that the form of nut-cracking behaviour relies on variants of social learning, with some researchers arguing, more precisely, that copying variants of social learning mechanisms are necessary. However, to date, very few experiments have directly investigated the potentially sufficient role of individual learning in explaining the behavioural form of nut-cracking. Despite this, the available data provides some evidence for the spontaneous acquisition of nut-cracking by chimpanzees; later group acquisition was then found to be at least facilitated by (unspecified) variants of social learning. The latter findings are in line with both suggested hypotheses, i.e., that copying social learning is required and that other (non-copying) social learning mechanisms are at play. Here we present the first study which focused (initially) on the role of individual learning for the acquisition of the nut-cracking behavioural form in chimpanzees. We tested task-naïve chimpanzees ( = 13) with an extended baseline condition to examine whether the behaviour would emerge spontaneously. After the baseline condition (which was unsuccessful), we tested for the role of social learning by providing social information in a step-wise fashion, culminating in a full action demonstration of nut-cracking by a human demonstrator (this last condition made it possible for the observers to copy all actions underlying the behaviour). Despite the opportunities to individually and/or socially learn nut-cracking, none of the chimpanzees tested here cracked nuts using tools in any of the conditions in our study; thus, providing no conclusive evidence for either competing hypothesis. We conclude that this failure was the product of an interplay of factors, including behavioural conservatism and the existence of a potential sensitive learning period for nut-cracking in chimpanzees. The possibility remains that nut-cracking is a behaviour that chimpanzees can individually learn. However, this behaviour might only be acquired when chimpanzees are still inside their sensitive learning period, and when ecological and developmental conditions allow for it. The possibility remains that nut-cracking is an example of a culture dependent trait in non-human great apes. Recommendations for future research projects to address this question are considered.

Citing Articles

An eye-tracking study of visual attention in chimpanzees and bonobos when viewing different tool-using techniques.

Piao Y, Brooks J, Yamamoto S Anim Cogn. 2025; 28(1):12.

PMID: 39932520 PMC: 11814020. DOI: 10.1007/s10071-025-01934-5.


Field experiments find no evidence that chimpanzee nut cracking can be independently innovated.

Koops K, Gaspard Soumah A, van Leeuwen K, Camara H, Matsuzawa T Nat Hum Behav. 2022; 6(4):487-494.

PMID: 35075258 DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01272-9.


Clarifying Misconceptions of the Zone of Latent Solutions Hypothesis: A Response to Haidle and Schlaudt: Miriam Noël Haidle and Oliver Schlaudt: Where Does Cumulative Culture Begin? A Plea for a Sociologically Informed Perspective (Biological Theory....

Bandini E, Reeves J, Snyder W, Tennie C Biol Theory. 2021; 16(2):76-82.

PMID: 34720770 PMC: 8550035. DOI: 10.1007/s13752-021-00374-x.


Problem solving in European bison (): two experimental approaches.

Caicoya A, Colell M, Ensenyat C, Amici F R Soc Open Sci. 2021; 8(4):201901.

PMID: 34007461 PMC: 8080012. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.201901.


The zone of latent solutions and its relevance to understanding ape cultures.

Tennie C, Bandini E, van Schaik C, Hopper L Biol Philos. 2020; 35(5):55.

PMID: 33093737 PMC: 7548278. DOI: 10.1007/s10539-020-09769-9.


References
1.
Byrne R . Culture in great apes: using intricate complexity in feeding skills to trace the evolutionary origin of human technical prowess. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2007; 362(1480):577-85. PMC: 2346518. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1996. View

2.
Tennie C, Call J, Tomasello M . Ratcheting up the ratchet: on the evolution of cumulative culture. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009; 364(1528):2405-15. PMC: 2865079. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0052. View

3.
Hayashi M, Mizuno Y, Matsuzawa T . How does stone-tool use emerge? Introduction of stones and nuts to naive chimpanzees in captivity. Primates. 2004; 46(2):91-102. DOI: 10.1007/s10329-004-0110-z. View

4.
Mercader J, Barton H, Gillespie J, Harris J, Kuhn S, Tyler R . 4,300-year-old chimpanzee sites and the origins of percussive stone technology. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104(9):3043-8. PMC: 1805589. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0607909104. View

5.
Whiten A, Horner V, Litchfield C, Marshall-Pescini S . How do apes ape?. Learn Behav. 2004; 32(1):36-52. DOI: 10.3758/bf03196005. View