Hand preference in fast-moving versus slow-moving actions in capuchin, Sapajus spp., and squirrel monkeys, Saimiri sciureus

Pouydebat, Emmanuelle; Borel, Antony; Chotard, Hélène; Fragaszy, Dorothy M.

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.09.008

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 110 publications

(120 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reasons underlying the sex differences in S. apella in relation to hand preference are not clear, however. It is possible that selective pressures linked to sex differences in foraging could account for these results (Hellner‐Burris et al, ; Melin, Fedigan, Young, & Kawamura, ; Pouydebat, Borel, Chotard, & Fragaszy, ; Rose, ). Nevertheless, the artificial environments of captivity with less variation and diversity in substrate could be a source of stress (Morgan & Tromborg, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This species probably evolved with a greater reliance on fast mobile prey such as lizards, which are particularly abundant and available year‐round in dry environments (Morton & James, ). In this scenario, group‐level left‐hand bias might be expected since capturing a fast‐moving prey could depend on the integration of the speed and trajectory of the prey with a quick forelimb movement, which is under control of the right hemisphere (Hellner‐Burris et al, ; MacNeilage, ; Pouydebat et al, ). Although our reasoning is speculative, it deserves further investigation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hand preferences and differences in extractive foraging in seven capuchin monkey species

Andrade

Sousa

2018

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tool use and extractive foraging could be drivers for right hand use preference. The robust capuchins, Sapajus, are more specialized for destructive and extractive foraging than the gracile capuchins, Cebus. Thus, we predicted them to show right-hand preference and higher rates of extractive foraging when compared to the gracile capuchins. We hypothesized that capuchins that evolved in dry habitats are predisposed to show higher rates of extractive foraging and right-hand preference. We employed the tube task (152 individuals) and an extractive foraging task (212 individuals) in seven species of capuchins in captive settings. Data on hand preference and extractive foraging were collected using focal and scan sampling, respectively. Contrary to our hypothesis, S. libidinosus showed significant left hand preference, while S. robustus and S. flavius showed a right hand preference. The species S. xanthosternos, S. flavius, and S. robustus engaged in extractive foraging significantly more often than S. apella, S. libidinosus, and Cebus albifrons. As expected, the gracile capuchins showed significant higher left-hand bias when compared to the robust capuchins. The findings from this study is the first indication of left-hand population level laterality in S. libidinosus, a species that evolved in an environment selecting for increased tool use. Although tool use has been associated with population level right handedness, or a strong trend to use the right hand, our results suggest the link between tool use and right-hand preference is simplistic, at least in Sapajus. The ultimate explanation for the differences in hand preference across species might be due to differences in use of key food resources. We suggest that capuchin monkeys from the Atlantic forest evolved under a stronger selective pressure for high reliance on bimanual feeding and extractive foraging, which requires more sequential actions and planning, than those species from the Amazonia forest and Caatinga/Cerrado dry forest.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hand preferences and differences in extractive foraging in seven capuchin monkey species

Andrade

Sousa

2018

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some authors have thus hypothesized the development of a strong manual preference in relation to the manufacture and complexity of tools (Corballis, 1987;Stock et al, 2013;Uomini and Gowlett, 2013;Uomini, 2009). Other studies show a greater effect of the nature and demands of the task as well as the type of object involved and the speed of the action (Forrester et al, 2013(Forrester et al, , 2012(Forrester et al, , 2011Pouydebat et al, 2014;Quaresmini et al, 2014;Rogers, 2009). The complexity of the task is therefore probably not the only criterion explaining the emergence of a strong manual preference.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Differences in hand preference among nonhuman primates appear to be due to complex relationships between various factors, such as the environment (life in the wild or captivity), or the complexity and nature of the task (type, speed) (e.g. Fagot and Vauclair, 1991;Hopkins et al, 2011;McGrew and Marchant, 1997;Mosquera et al, 2012;Pouydebat et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right or left? Determining the hand holding the tool from use traces

Rodriguez

Pouydebat

Chacón

et al. 2020

Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, we test whether and how food properties modify the use of the hands. As has been described for primates (Pouydebat et al, 2009(Pouydebat et al, , 2014Toussaint et al, 2013Toussaint et al, , 2015, the mobility and the size of a prey item may affect the grasping and manipulation strategies used (e.g. the use of two hands versus one hand, and which fingers are involved in grasping).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of food properties on grasping and manipulation in the aquatic frog,Xenopus laevis

Anzeraey¹,

Aumont²,

Décamps³

et al. 2017

Journal of Experimental Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to grasp an object is fundamental from an evolutionary perspective. Involved in many daily activities, grasping has been extensively studied in primates and other mammals. Yet other groups of tetrapods, including anurans, have also evolved significant forelimb prehensile capacities that are often thought to have originated in an arboreal context. In addition, grasping is also observed in aquatic species. But how aquatic frogs use their forelimbs to capture and manipulate prey remains largely unknown. The aim of this study is to explore how the grasping and manipulation of food items in aquatic frogs is impacted by food properties such as size and mobility. To do so, we uses the aquatic frog and quantified the use of the hands and fingers while processing mobile and stationary prey of different sizes (small, intermediate and large). Our results show that is able to individualize the digits and that the mobility and the length of the prey significantly influence the kind of grasping pattern used. Grasping abilities are thus not specific to terrestrial or arboreal species. These results illustrate how prey properties impact grasping and manipulation strategies in an aquatic frog and shed further light on the ecological contexts that may have given rise to the origin of grasping in frogs.

show abstract

Hand preference in fast-moving versus slow-moving actions in capuchin, Sapajus spp., and squirrel monkeys, Saimiri sciureus

Cited by 13 publications

References 110 publications

Hand preferences and differences in extractive foraging in seven capuchin monkey species

Hand preferences and differences in extractive foraging in seven capuchin monkey species

Right or left? Determining the hand holding the tool from use traces

The effect of food properties on grasping and manipulation in the aquatic frog,Xenopus laevis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About