Could plant extracts have enabled hominins to acquire honey before the control of fire?

Abstract

Honey is increasingly recognized as an important food item in human evolution, but it remains unclear whether extinct hominins could have overcome the formidable collective stinging defenses of honey bees during honey acquisition. The utility of smoke for this purpose is widely recognized, but little research has explored alternative methods of sting deterrence such as the use of plant secondary compounds. To consider whether hominins could have used plant extracts as a precursor or alternative to smoke, we review the ethnographic, ethnobotanical, and plant chemical ecology literature to examine how humans use plants in combination with, and independently of, smoke during honey collection. Plant secondary compounds are diverse in their physiological and behavioral effects on bees and differ fundamentally from those of smoke. Plants containing these chemicals are widespread and prove to be remarkably effective in facilitating honey collection by honey hunters and beekeepers worldwide. While smoke may be superior as a deterrent to bees, plant extracts represent a plausible precursor or alternative to the use of smoke during honey collection by hominins. Smoke is a sufficient but not necessary condition for acquiring honey in amounts exceeding those typically obtained by chimpanzees, suggesting that significant honey consumption could have predated the control of fire.

The ecology and evolution of human‐wildlife cooperation

“…One possibility is that cooperation between hominins and honeyguides originated when Homo erectus first controlled fire, allowing them to use smoke to subdue the bees (possibly 1.5 million years ago, Wrangham, 2011; Gowlett, 2016). Another is that they placated the bees with techniques other than smoke, such as using leaves, fungal spores or water (Kraft & Venkataraman, 2015; Laltaika, 2021). While the date of the earliest human‐honeyguide cooperation is still unknown, this discussion highlights that if an interaction is at least in part genetically controlled it could in theory be maintained for tens of thousands of generations or more.…”

Hominin subsistence and site function of TD10.1 bone bed level at Gran Dolina site (Atapuerca) during the late Acheulean

“…In recent decades, a large amount of evidence has accumulated to support the view that Middle Palaeolithic hominins were regular hunters of large game. At least regionally, their diets included small prey, megafauna and other ‘collectables’ such as honey, marine molluscs, tortoises and fish (Speth and Tchernov, ; Conard and Prindiville, ; Patou‐Mathis, ; Speth and Tchernov, , ; Stiner, , 2013; Kuhn and Stiner, ; Schreve, ; Speth and Clark, ; Yeshurun et al ., ; Stringer et al ., ; Villa and Lenoir, ; Cochard et al ., ; Blasco and Fernández‐Peris, ; Gaudzinski‐Windheuser and Kindler, ; Rosell et al ., ; Yravedra et al ., ; Kuhn, ; Fiorenza et al ., ; Kraft and Venkataraman, ; Smith, ; Yravedra and Cobo‐Sánchez, ). The faunal assemblages and taphonomic inferences derived from them represent the main empirical basis for the construction of this hypothesis.…”

Honey Bee Diversity in Urban and Peri-urban Agriculture and Urban Forest- Outlook Study from Bengaluru-Silicon Valley of India: A Review

“…The pre-historic relationship between humans and honey bees exists based on long-standing interest (Cardinal and Danforth 2011;Kraft and Venkataraman 2015) of increasing crop production through pollination and maintain ecosystem stability, environmental quality and biodiversity (Abrol 2013). The Indian bee-keepers rear honey bees in a traditional system under semi-domesticated conditions amended with modern scientific practices (Kraft and Venkataraman 2015). Rearing of honey bees and harvesting of honey dates back to 7000 BC.…”