2 results
14 - Traditions in wild white-faced capuchin monkeys
-
- By Susan Perry, Assistant Professor in the Department of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles, Melissa Panger, Department of Anthropology, George Washington University, 2110 G St. NW, Washington, DC 20052, USA, Lisa M. Rose, Department of Anthropology and Sociology, University of British Columbia. 6303 NW Marine Drive, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6T, Mary Baker, Department of Anthropology, Whittier College, 13406 Philadelphia St., Whittier, CA 90608, USA, Julie Gros-Louis, Department of Psychology, University of Indiana, 1101 E. 10th St., Bloomington, IN 47405, USA, Katherine Jack, Department of Anthropology, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC 28608, USA, Katherine C. Mackinnon, Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, Saint Louis University, 3500 Lindell Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63103, USA, Joseph Manson, Max-Planck-Institut für evolutionäre Anthropologie, Inselstraße 22, 04103 Leipzig, Germany, Linda Fedigan, Department of Anthropology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada, Kendra Pyle, Department of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA
- Edited by Dorothy M. Fragaszy, University of Georgia, Susan Perry, University of California, Los Angeles
-
- Book:
- The Biology of Traditions
- Published online:
- 27 October 2009
- Print publication:
- 03 July 2003, pp 391-425
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Primatologists have long recognized that social learning could play an important role in food choice and food processing in primates, since the discovery (by Itani in 1958) of innovative food-processing techniques disseminated among Japanese macaques (see Ch. 10 for a review of subsequent findings). It is somewhat surprising that, after the initial discovery of the importance of social learning in Japanese macaques, practically all subsequent research on social learning in wild nonhuman primates has been on apes (e.g. Boesch, 1996a, 1996b; Boesch and Boesch-Achermann, 2000; Boesch and Tomasello, 1998; McGrew, 1992, 1998; van Schaik, Deaner, and Merrill, 1999; Whiten et al., 1999; see Chs. 10 and 11). To remedy the gap in what we know about social learning in natural settings in other primates, and because a truly comparative framework is necessary to understand the biological underpinnings of social learning (see Ch. 1), we began a comprehensive study of social learning in wild capuchin monkeys (Cebus spp.). Our study investigates the probable role of social learning in a number of behavioral domains.
Capuchins seem particularly likely to exhibit extensive reliance on learning, and social learning in particular, for the following reasons (Fragaszy, Visalberghi, and Fedigan, 2003). Several aspects of capuchin ecology promote behavioral flexibility. First, the genus Cebus occupies a wider geographic area than any other New World genus apart from Alouatta (Emmons, 1997), and it uses many different habitat types. Therefore, capuchins face a wide variety of environmental challenges.
The Adoption of the Bow and Arrow in Eastern North America: A View from Central Arkansas
- Michael S. Nassaney, Kendra Pyle
-
- Journal:
- American Antiquity / Volume 64 / Issue 2 / April 1999
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 243-263
- Print publication:
- April 1999
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
North American archaeologists have long been interested in distinguishing between dart and arrow points in order to establish when bow-and-arrow technology was adopted in the Eastern Woodlands. A quantitative analysis of point form and qualitative reconstructions of bifacial reduction trajectories from Plum Bayou culture sites in central Arkansas indicate that arrow points were abruptly adopted and became widespread about A.D. 600. Moreover, arrow points are metrically discrete entities that were not developed through gradual modification of dart points in this region as appears to be the case elsewhere. Comparisons with patterns observed in other regions of the East show significant variation in the timing, rate, and direction of the adoption of the bow and arrow, as well as the role of this technological change in Native American economies and sociopolitics. These observations suggest that the bow and arrow were: (1) introduced significantly earlier than some researchers have posited; (2) independently invented by some groups and diffused to others; and (3) relinquished and later readopted in some areas of the Eastern Woodlands in response to changing social, historical, and environmental conditions. Our data also call into question simple unilinear or diffusionary models that claim to explain the development and spread of this technological innovation.