Underestimating Kanzi? Exploring Kanzi-Oldowan comparisons in light of recent human stone tool replication

Captive bonobos (Pan paniscus) apply precision grips when using flaked stone tools

OBJECTIVES

Current evidence suggests that flaked stone tool technologies did not emerge until ~3.3-2.6 million-years-ago (Ma). It is often hypothesized that early hominin (principally Ardipithecus and early Australopithecus) manual anatomy may have prevented an earlier emergence, as the forceful precision grips essential to flake tool-use may have been ineffectively performed by these species. Marzke, Marchant, McGrew, and Reece (2015) observed potentially forceful pad-to-side precision grips being recruited by wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) during feeding behaviors, indicating that Pan-like manual anatomy, and therefore potentially early hominin anatomy, may be capable of effectively securing flake stone tools during their use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Here, we report on the grips recruited by four captive, human-trained, bonobos (Pan paniscus) during the use of stone and organic tools, including flake stone tools during cutting behaviors.

RESULTS

It is revealed that pad-to-side precision grips are frequently recruited by these bonobos when securing stone flakes during cutting actions. In some instances, high forces could have been resisted and applied by the thumb and fingers.

DISCUSSION

While our analyzes are preliminary and limited to captive individuals, and Pan is not suggested to secure flakes with the same efficacy as Homo or Australopithecus, it points to early hominins potentially being able to perform the precision grips required to use flake stone tools. In turn, the ability to gain tangible benefits from the effective use of flake tools (i.e., gain energetic returns from processing food resources) may have been - at least anatomically - possible in early Australopithecus and other pre-Early Stone Age hominin species. In turn, hominin manual anatomy may not be a leading restriction on the emergence of the earliest stone tool technologies.

A primate model for the origin of flake technology

When and how human ancestors first used tools remains unknown, despite intense research into the origins of technology. It has been hypothesized that the evolutionary roots of stone flake technology has its origin in percussive behavior. Before intentional stone flaking, hominins potentially engaged in various percussive behaviors resulting in accidental flake detachments. We refer to this scenario as the 'by-product hypothesis.' In this scenario, repeated detachments of sharp stone fragments eventually resulted in intentional flake production. Here, we tested the circumstances of accidental flake production as a by-product of percussive foraging in wild capuchin monkeys (Sapajus libidinosus) from Brazil, the only nonhuman primate known to habitually produce sharp-edged flakes through a percussive behavior. We conducted field experiments where we tested the potential for accidental flake production during nut cracking. We provided three different types of stone with varied material properties as anvils to assess the circumstances in which accidental production of sharp-edged flakes occurs during nut cracking. A further freehand knapping experiment, with the raw material that exhibited accidental flake detachments, allows a direct comparison of flakes that have been intentionally produced by an experienced knapper and flakes produced during nut cracking by capuchin monkeys. Our results show that raw material quality and morphology significantly affect the rate of sharp-edged flake production as well as the resulting lithic signature of this behavior. In addition, accidental flakes produced during capuchin nut cracking on highly isotropic raw material are similar in many respects to intentionally produced flakes by a human knapper. Our field experiments highlight the fact that nut-cracking behavior can lead to the unintentional production of substantial quantities of sharp-edged flakes and therefore supports the 'by-product hypothesis' as a potential mechanism for the emergence of hominin flake technology.

Naïve, unenculturated chimpanzees fail to make and use flaked stone tools

Background: Despite substantial research on early hominin lithic technologies, the learning mechanisms underlying flake manufacture and use are contested. To draw phylogenetic inferences on the potential cognitive processes underlying the acquisition of both of these abilities in early hominins, we investigated if and how one of our closest living relatives, chimpanzees ( Pan troglodytes), could learn to make and use flakes. Methods: Across several experimental conditions, we tested eleven task-naïve chimpanzees (unenculturated n=8, unknown status n=3) from two independent populations for their abilities to spontaneously make and subsequently use flakes as well as to use flakes made by a human experimenter. Results: Despite the fact that the chimpanzees seemed to understand the requirements of the task, were sufficiently motivated and had ample opportunities to develop the target behaviours, none of the chimpanzees tested made or used flakes in any of the experimental conditions. Conclusions: These results differ from all previous ape flaking experiments, which found flake manufacture and use in bonobos and one orangutan. However, these earlier studies tested human-enculturated apes and provided test subjects with flake making and using demonstrations. The contrast between these earlier positive findings and our negative findings (despite using a much larger sample size) suggests that enculturation and/or demonstrations may be necessary for chimpanzees to acquire these abilities. The data obtained in this study are consistent with the hypothesis that flake manufacture and use might have evolved in the hominin lineage after the split between Homo and Pan 7 million years ago, a scenario further supported by the initial lack of flaked stone tools in the archaeological record after this split. We discuss possible evolutionary scenarios for flake manufacture and use in both non-hominin and hominin lineages.