Abstract: Abstract  Both in captivity and the wild, primates are found to travel mostly to the nearest available resource, but they may skip over the closest resource and travel to more distant resources, which are often found to be more productive. This study examines the tradeoff between distance and reward in the foraging choices of one group of wild capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella nigritus) using feeding platforms in large-scale foraging experiments conducted over four years. Three feeding sites were arrayed in an oblique triangle, such that once the monkey group had chosen one site to feed, they had a choice between two remaining sites, a close one with less food and the other up to 2.3 times as far away but with more food. Sites were provisioned once per day. The capuchins generally chose the closer feeding site, even when the more distant site offered up to 12 times as much food. The distances to, rewards of, or various profitability measures applied to each alternative site individually did not explain the groups choices in ways consistent with foraging theory or principles of operant psychology. The groups site choices were predicted only by comparing efficiency measures of entire foraging pathways: (1) direct travel to the more rewarding distant site, versus (2) the longer “detour” through the closer site on the way to the more distant one. The group chose the detour more often when the reward was larger and the added detour distance shorter. They appeared to be more sensitive to the absolute increase in detour distance than to the relative increase compared to the straight route. The qualitative and quantitative results agree with a simple rule: do not use the detour unless the energy gain from extra food outweighs the energy cost of extra travel. These results suggest that members of this group integrate information on spatial location, reward, and perhaps potential food competition in their choice of multi-site foraging routes, with important implications for social foraging.

Abstract: Abstract  Many wild primates occupy large home ranges and travel long distances each day. Navigating these ranges to find sufficient food presents a substantial cognitive challenge, but we are still far from understanding either how primates represent spatial information mentally or how they use this information to navigate under natural conditions. In the course of a long-term socioecological study, we investigated and compared the travel paths of sympatric spider monkeys (Ateles belzebuth) and woolly monkeys (Lagothrix poeppigii) in Amazonian Ecuador. During several field seasons spanning an 8-year period, we followed focal individuals or groups of both species continuously for periods of multiple days and mapped their travel paths in detail. We found that both primates typically traveled through their home ranges following repeatedly used paths, or “routes”. Many of these routes were common to both species and were stable across study years. Several important routes appeared to be associated with distinct topographic features (e.g., ridgetops), which may constitute easily recognized landmarks useful for spatial navigation. The majority of all location records for both species fell along or near identified routes, as did most of the trees used for fruit feeding. Our results provide strong support for the idea that both woolly and spider monkey use route-based mental maps similar to those proposed by Poucet (Psychol Rev 100:163-182, 1993). We suggest that rather than remembering the specific locations of thousands of individual feeding trees and their phenological schedules, spider and woolly monkeys could nonetheless forage efficiently by committing to memory a series of route segments that, when followed, bring them into contact with many potential feeding sources for monitoring or visitation. Furthermore, because swallowed and defecated seeds are deposited in greater frequency along routes, the repeated use of particular travel paths over generations could profoundly influence the structure and composition of tropical forests, raising the intriguing possibility that these and other primate frugivores are active participants in constructing their own ecological niches. Building upon the insights of Byrne (Q J Exp Psychol 31:147-154, 1979, Normality and pathology in cognitive functions. Academic, London, pp 239-264, 1982) and Milton (The foraging strategy of howler monkeys: a study in primate economics. Columbia University Press, New York, 1980, On the move: how and why animals travel in groups. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 375-417, 2000), our results highlight the likely general importance of route-based travel in the memory and foraging strategies of nonhuman primates.

Abstract: Geographical cataloguing of traits, as used in human ethnography, has led to the description of “culture” in some non-human great apes. Culture, in these terms, is detected as a pattern of local ignorance resulting from environmental constraints on knowledge transmission. However, in many cases, the geographical variations may alternatively be explained by ecology. Social transmission of information can reliably be identified in many other animal species, by experiment or distinctive patterns in distribution; but the excitement of detecting culture in great apes derives from the possibility of understanding the evolution of cumulative technological culture in humans. Given this interest, I argue that great ape research should concentrate on technically complex behaviour patterns that are ubiquitous within a local population; in these cases, a wholly non-social ontogeny is highly unlikely. From this perspective, cultural transmission has an important role in the elaborate feeding skills of all species of great ape, in conveying the “gist” or organization of skills. In contrast, social learning is unlikely to be responsible for local stylistic differences, which are apt to reflect sensitive adaptations to ecology.