論文

査読有り
2015年

Why do wild bonobos not use tools like chimpanzees do?

BEHAVIOUR
  • T. Furuichi
  • ,
  • C. Sanz
  • ,
  • K. Koops
  • ,
  • T. Sakamaki
  • ,
  • H. Ryu
  • ,
  • N. Tokuyama
  • ,
  • D. Morgan

152
3-4
開始ページ
425
終了ページ
460
記述言語
英語
掲載種別
研究論文(学術雑誌)
DOI
10.1163/1568539X-00003226
出版者・発行元
BRILL ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS

One of the most conspicuous behavioural differences among great apes is the paucity of tool use among wild bonobos (Pan paniscus) in comparison to chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) who are one of the most prolific and skilled tool users in the animal kingdom. This is in spite of the fact that bonobo tool use repertories are as large and diverse as chimpanzees' in captive settings. In this study, we compared tool using behaviours and potential drivers of these behaviours in the Wamba bonobo population located in central Democratic Republic of Congo with the Goualougo chimpanzee population of northern Republic of Congo. The tool use repertoire of wild bonobos was comprised of only 13 behaviours, compared to 42 for chimpanzees. However, the number of tool behaviours observed in each study site was similar between bonobos and chimpanzees, and many types of tool use for social, self-grooming/stimulation, and comfort/protection functions were commonly used by both species. A marked difference is that 25 of 42 tool behaviours exhibited by chimpanzees are performed for feeding, in contrast to a single report of bonobos using a leaf sponge to drink water. We examined whether the differences in tool use repertoires can be explained by the necessity, opportunity, relative profitability, or invention hypotheses. We found that habitat composition and fluctuation of fruit production at these two sites were similar, particularly when compared with variation observed between sites within each species. Thus it was unlikely that the necessity hypothesis explains the lack of tool use for feeding in bonobos. Though further study at Wamba is needed, we did not identify any obvious differences in prey availability that would indicate differences in tool using opportunities between the sites. This study could not test the relative profitability hypothesis, and further research is needed on whether tool use is the most efficient means of calorie or protein intake for wild apes. Bonobos at Wamba formed much larger and stable parties than chimpanzees at Goualougo, which was contrary to the prediction by the invention hypothesis. Another explanation is that differences in tool use behaviour between bonobos and chimpanzees might not be explained by the current ecological or social conditions, but rather by circumstances during the Pleistocene Epoch. The observed species differences might also reflect divergent behavioural predispositions, rather than actual differences in cognitive abilities.

リンク情報
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/1568539X-00003226
Web of Science
https://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=JSTA_CEL&SrcApp=J_Gate_JST&DestLinkType=FullRecord&KeyUT=WOS:000349229100009&DestApp=WOS_CPL
ID情報
  • DOI : 10.1163/1568539X-00003226
  • ISSN : 0005-7959
  • eISSN : 1568-539X
  • Web of Science ID : WOS:000349229100009

エクスポート
BibTeX RIS