DOI: 10.11606/t.47.2021.tde-28052021-141937
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Investigação do uso espontâneo de ferramentas por macacos-prego selvagens (Sapajus libidinosus) do Parque Nacional Serra das Confusões PI

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The stone tool use behavior observed so far at UNP appears to fit the most usual pattern of cracking hard‐shelled resources we observe in other Caatinga and Cerrado populations previously studied (Table 8). For this comparison, we used populations that had more than 5 days of surveys or longer studies (Chalk et al, 2015; Coutinho, 2021; De Moraes et al, 2014; Falótico & Ottoni, 2016; Falótico et al, 2018, 2022; Ferraz et al, 2003; Mannu & Ottoni, 2009; L. P. C. dos Santos, 2015; Visalberghi et al, 2008, 2016). For lack of space and simplicity, this comparison table does not include the behaviors of stone tools to aid in digging, stone on stone, or stone‐throwing, which are behaviors, so far, only customarily registered at the SCaNP capuchin population (Haslam et al, 2018).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The stone tool use behavior observed so far at UNP appears to fit the most usual pattern of cracking hard‐shelled resources we observe in other Caatinga and Cerrado populations previously studied (Table 8). For this comparison, we used populations that had more than 5 days of surveys or longer studies (Chalk et al, 2015; Coutinho, 2021; De Moraes et al, 2014; Falótico & Ottoni, 2016; Falótico et al, 2018, 2022; Ferraz et al, 2003; Mannu & Ottoni, 2009; L. P. C. dos Santos, 2015; Visalberghi et al, 2008, 2016). For lack of space and simplicity, this comparison table does not include the behaviors of stone tools to aid in digging, stone on stone, or stone‐throwing, which are behaviors, so far, only customarily registered at the SCaNP capuchin population (Haslam et al, 2018).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this comparison, we used populations that had more than 5 days of surveys or longer studies (Chalk et al, 2015;Coutinho, 2021;De Moraes et al, 2014;Falótico et al, 2018Falótico et al, , 2022Ferraz et al, 2003;Mannu & Ottoni, 2009;L. P. C. dos Santos, 2015;Visalberghi et al, 2008Visalberghi et al, , 2016.…”
Section: Population Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, some differences are more subtle. Even though cashew nuts were available and softer than cashew nuts present in the SCaNP population, SCoNP monkeys do not eat cashew nuts, with or without stone tools 31 . Since the absence of consumption of this food resource in SCoNP is neither because of availability or impossibility of access, one could argue that this difference is a cultural behavior.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…As for dry cashew, we found signi cant differences in both physical properties (Mann-Whitney, Z=23, p=0.017; Mann-Whitney, Z=23, p=0.018), with SCaNP nuts being harder and less elastic. We could not compare stone tools for cashews because SCoNP monkeys had not been observed to explore this resource, with or without tools 8,31 .…”
Section: Comparison Between Populationsmentioning
confidence: 99%