Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Tuesday, April 17, 2007 | Science : Evolution and Biology | print version Print | Comments

Document Almost Human, and Sometimes Smarter

by John Noble Wilford

Reposted from the NYTimes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/17/science/17chimp.html?ref=science

CHICAGO — Observed in the wild and tested in captivity, chimpanzees invite comparison with humans, their close relatives. They bear a family resemblance that fascinates people, and scientists see increasing evidence of similarities in chimp behavior and skills, making some of them think on the vagaries of evolution.

For some time, paleontologists and evolutionary biologists have known that chimp ancestors were the last line of today's apes to diverge from the branch that led to humans, probably six million, maybe four million years ago. More recent examination shows that despite profound differences in the two species, just a 1.23 percent difference in their genes separates Homo sapiens from chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes.

And certain similarities between the two species, scientists say, go beyond expressive faces and opposable thumbs.

Chimps display a remarkable range of behavior and talent. They make and use simple tools, hunt in groups and engage in aggressive, violent acts. They are social creatures that appear to be capable of empathy, altruism, self-awareness, cooperation in problem solving and learning through example and experience. Chimps even outperform humans in some memory tasks.

"Fifty years ago, we knew next to nothing about chimpanzees," said Andrew Whiten, an evolutionary psychologist at the University of St Andrews in Scotland. "You could not have predicted the richness and complexity of chimp culture that we know now."

Jane Goodall, a young English woman working in Africa in the 1960s, began changing perceptions. At first, experts disputed her reports of chimps' using tools and social behavior. The experts especially objected to her references to chimp culture. Just humans, they insisted, had "culture."

"Jane suffered early rejection by the establishment," Richard Wrangham, a Harvard anthropologist, said. "Now, the people who say chimpanzees don't have emotions and culture are the ones rejected."

The new consensus framed discussions in March at a symposium, "The Mind of the Chimpanzee," at the Lincoln Park Zoo here. More than 300 primatologists and other scientists reviewed accumulating knowledge of chimps' cognitive abilities.

After one session, Frans de Waal of Emory University said that as recently as a decade ago there was still no firm consensus on many of the social relationships of chimps. "You don't hear any debate now," he said.

In his own studies at the Yerkes Primate Research Center at Emory, Dr. de Waal found that chimps as social animals have had to constrain and alter their behavior in various ways, as have humans. It is a part of ape inheritance, he said, and in the case of humans, the basis for morality. The provocative interpretation was advanced in his recent book, "Primates and Philosophers."

Other reports shortly before the symposium had elaborated on the abilities of chimps as toolmakers. Jill Pruetz, a primatologist at Iowa State University, described 22 examples of chimps in Senegal making stick spears to hunt smaller primates for their meat. Dr. Goodall was the first to call attention to chimps as hunting carnivores, not strictly vegetarians.

Dr. Pruetz observed several chimps jabbing the spears into hollow tree trunks where bush babies often dwell. Just one attempt was successful. Previously, chimps had been seen using sticks mainly to extract termites from their nests.

A team of archaeologists led by Julio Mercader of the University of Calgary reported finding stones in Ivory Coast that chimps used 4,300 years ago to crack nuts. Today's chimps have often been videotaped using rocks as a hammer to open nuts. The old stones with starch residues from nuts, the researchers said, were the earliest strong evidence of chimp tool use, and the finding suggested that chimps had learned the skill on their own, rather than copying humans.

Other researchers combine field work showing chimp behavior in natural habitats with laboratory experiments that are created to disclose their underlying intelligence — what scientists call their "cognitive reserve."

For example, chimps on their own would not sit at a computer responding with rapid touches on the screen as a test of their immediate memory. Videos of their doing just that at Kyoto University in Japan especially impressed the symposium scientists.

Tetsuro Matsuzawa, a Kyoto primatologist, described a young chimp watching as numbers 1 through 9 flashed on the computer screen at random positions. Then the numbers disappeared in no more than a second. White squares remained where the numbers had been. The chimp casually but swiftly pressed the squares, calling back the numbers in ascending order — 1, 2, 3, etc.

The test was repeated several times, with the numbers and squares in different places. The chimp, which had months of training accompanied by promised food rewards, almost never failed to remember where the numbers had been. The video included scenes of a human failing the test, seldom recalling more than one or two numbers, if any.

"Humans can't do it," Dr. Matsuzawa said. "Chimpanzees are superior to humans in this task."

Dr. Matsuzawa suggested that early human species "lost the immediate memory and, in return, learned symbolization, the language skills."

"I call this the trade-off theory," he continued. "If you want a capability like better immediate memory, you have to lose some other capability."

Other experiments at Kyoto's primate center demonstrated the ability of chimps to recognize themselves and focus attention on others. Masaki Tomonaga, who conducted the tests, said that an infant made eye with its mother at about 2 months and that sometime after the first year was able to maintain a gaze as the mother moved about.

Dr. Tomonaga said such "gaze following" developed in humans about the same age, "though infant humans generally have more complex interactions."

Misato Hayashi, also from Kyoto, described experiments with infant chimps' manipulating nesting cups and square and cylindrical blocks. They were slower to learn than humans, but the manual dexterity was there. A human starts stacking blocks shortly after age 1, he said; chimps are almost 3 before getting the hang of it.

In experiments with mirrors, researchers showed that chimps had an awareness of themselves that is absent in monkeys but present in dolphins and all the great apes. Similar tests by Emory scientists showed some self-recognition among elephants.

These behaviors were reported by Dr. de Waal and his associate J. M. Plotnik, who said that they "may suggest convergent cognitive evolution probably related to complex sociality and cooperation well documented in both chimpanzees and elephants."

Other researchers said that when confronted with problems obtaining food from the other side of a fence, chimps were not only clever on their own and often competitive with a fellow chimp, but they also showed a willingness to cooperate with one another to get the job done.

Brian Hare of Duke University and the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, said bonobos outperformed their chimp relatives in cooperative tasks and shared food more readily.

The emotions of caring and mourning have been observed, as in the case of the chimp mother that carried on her back the corpse of her 2-year-old daughter for days after she had died. After fights between two chimps, scientists said, others in the group were seen consoling the loser and acting as mediators to restore peace.

Devyn Carter of Emory described the sympathetic response to a chimp named Knuckles, who was afflicted with cerebral palsy. No fellow chimp was seen to take advantage of his disability. Even the alpha male gently groomed Knuckles.

Dr. Wrangham of Harvard said the challenge to primatologists working in the field was to learn how much of the behavior and "surplus cognitive capacity" observed in captivity applied in the wild.

The answer seems to vary from one isolated chimp community to another. Scientists said that indicated the role of social learning — picking up skills by emulation — and responses to different opportunities in separate cultures.

At Gombe, the site in Tanzania where Dr. Goodall made a name for herself, the chimps with stick tools are accomplished extractors of termites from their nests. But termite fishing is rare in Bossou, Guinea. At Bossou, and not Gombe, chimps have learned to make use of many other tools, including stones for cracking nuts.

Dora Biro of the University of Oxford in England has studied tool use by chimps at the Bossou site. They fold leaves in a mat to sponge water out of tree hollows and scoop algae off stream surfaces. They collect edible ants with sticks. They take stouter tree branches and pound the juicy palm fiber to a pulp, preparing another favorite food.

Videos of Bossou nutcrackers show adult chimps, often female, placing a nut on a flat stone anvil and slamming down on it with a smaller rock. Two or three youngsters sit around watching. The adults do not appear to be giving instructions, except by example.

"What we've learned is that manipulation of objects begins around 1 year of age," Dr. Biro said. "If it involves two or three objects, as in cracking nuts, that happens at 3 ˝ to 5 years. If it is not learned by 6 or 7, it will never be acquired."

At a dense forest in the Congo Republic, Crickette M. Sanz of the Max Planck institute said the chimps seemed as curious about her as she was about them. Groups came forward, calling others to join them. Sometimes, they sat with her for hours, eating fruit, grooming and even mating.

For a more detached study, Dr. Sanz deployed 18 video cameras at remote locations and recorded 84 hours of chimp tool use. Leaf sponging was the simplest, she concluded, and collecting honey with a long stick required the most effort and risk, with termite fishing having "the highest element of success."

Dr. Sanz, who has worked with her husband, David B. Morgan, on some of the research, described mother chimps' carefully withdrawing from a hole sticks swarming with black termites while their infants looked on. These social interactions, she said, passed on essential techniques and behaviors to the next generation.

"Socially transmitted adjustable behavior," Dr. de Waal said, is a hallmark of culture.

Chimp behavior sometimes turns violent, particularly in territorial clashes. In Uganda, John Mitani of the University of Michigan observed chimp patrols regularly policing the forest boundaries of their communities. One patrol was seen assaulting an adult male, killing and emasculating him.

Kristin Bonnie, another Emory primatologist, said the transmission of behavior could be benign and spontaneous, with the prospect of reward being secondary. "It is the desire to act like others, an identification with certain others," she explained, citing as an example the way chimps usually clasp hands while grooming each other.

At the symposium, researchers said the interest in learning more about chimps was not just a case of knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Their behavior and intelligence, scientists say, may offer insights into the abilities of early human ancestors like Australopithecus afarensis, the apelike "Lucy" species that thrived more than three million years ago. A more urgent motivation for the research, primatologists say, is that these are sentient beings and the closest living relatives of humans, and their survival is threatened.

Elizabeth V. Lonsdorf, a primatologist at the Lincoln Park Zoo and a symposium organizer, said researchers needed "to keep their eyes out for ways to improve the care of chimpanzees."

Diseases like ebola and anthrax are taking their toll. Hunting chimps for "bush meat" is increasing. Many of the forest habitats of chimps in central Africa are being cut by loggers and land developers. As a result, Dr. Lonsdorf said, "Groups of the animals are getting closer together, which increased the threat of chimp violence and territorial disputes."

Dr. Goodall recalled that when she went to Africa nearly a half-century ago, at least a million chimps lived in the continent, and "now there are perhaps only 150,000." In that time, they have impressed scientists with physical and emotional reminders of their kinship to humans and their occasional triumphs over them at a computer screen.


Comments 1 - 12 of 12 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #32608 by Yorker on April 17, 2007 at 3:11 pm

In the terrific book "Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors", Carl Sagan and Annie Druyan described all these and one more chimp characteristic several years ago. The additional thing was that Hrdy, another researcher, had reported that male chimps would masturbate to pictures of human females.

Other Comments by Yorker

2. Comment #32611 by mummymonkey on April 17, 2007 at 3:16 pm

"... when she went to Africa nearly a half-century ago, at least a million chimps lived in the continent, and "now there are perhaps only 150,000."

A chimp holocaust, nothing less.

Other Comments by mummymonkey

3. Comment #32612 by elvenearth on April 17, 2007 at 3:24 pm

What else would they masturbate to? Pictures of female chimps? Other ape species? Human males?

Other Comments by elvenearth

4. Comment #32616 by Nails on April 17, 2007 at 3:40 pm

 avatar3. Comment #32612 by elvenearth on April 17, 2007 at 3:24 pm


What else would they masturbate to? Pictures of female chimps? Other ape species? Human males?

if they're anything like us human males, they'll masturbate over anything....


Chimp behavior sometimes turns violent, particularly in territorial clashes. In Uganda, John Mitani of the University of Michigan observed chimp patrols regularly policing the forest boundaries of their communities. One patrol was seen assaulting an adult male, killing and emasculating him.

Hell, removal of genitalia. Now that's just nasty!!

Other Comments by Nails

5. Comment #32629 by denoir on April 17, 2007 at 5:25 pm

 avatar
The test was repeated several times, with the numbers and squares in different places. The chimp, which had months of training accompanied by promised food rewards, almost never failed to remember where the numbers had been. The video included scenes of a human failing the test, seldom recalling more than one or two numbers, if any.

"Humans can't do it," Dr. Matsuzawa said. "Chimpanzees are superior to humans in this task."


Ah, yes, but did the human have months of training with rewards?

Reinforcement learning can be deceptive - you can train most animals step by step to perform complex sequences of tasks. Even relatively simple (neurologically speaking) animals such as fruit flies can be trained to learn stuff after being subjected to a reward/punishment scheme.

I'm not saying that there isn't any value to these experiments but saying that chimps can do it while humans cannot may be jumping the gun a bit. The human and chimpanzee subjects would have had to gone through the same experiment - which they most likely didn't in this case. The chimp subjects had been subjected to reinforcement learning for months while the human subjects have presumably not. Both human and chimp brains are adaptive systems and it is reasonable to assume that months of training can make a difference.

Other Comments by denoir

6. Comment #32635 by Yorker on April 17, 2007 at 6:53 pm

3. Comment #32612 by elvenearth

Was that a joke? If it was, I don't get it, if not, then you evidently fail to see the significance of it.

Would you masturbate over a picture of a female chimp?

Other Comments by Yorker

7. Comment #32646 by BT Murtagh on April 17, 2007 at 9:29 pm

 avatarI'll go even further than denoir in 32629; the researcher is just plain wrong. Humans are perfectly capable of doing this; it's a simpler version of a memory game which my son mastered at about the age of 5, and with a greater number of symbols involved too. I don't know if a chimp would be able to do it faster than him, but he could do up to 20 matches (the maximum the program offered) very swiftly indeed.

You can also see human adults doing similar games in bars all over the US, usually with successful answers revealing a picture of a scantily-clad human female, and generally doing quite well.

Other Comments by BT Murtagh

8. Comment #32663 by juandelaforet on April 18, 2007 at 12:05 am

 avatar"Would you masturbate over a picture of a female chimp?"

...I guess it depends on if she was a "looker"...??? ;-)

Other Comments by juandelaforet

9. Comment #32664 by elvenearth on April 18, 2007 at 12:17 am

Comment #32635 by Yorker:

"Was that a joke? If it was, I don't get it, if not, then you evidently fail to see the significance of it.

Would you masturbate over a picture of a female chimp?"


I was curious about two things. One, what types of pictures would they respond to? Two, to what degree would this cross different species? I fail to see how these are not legitimately interesting questions that explore the sexual behaviour of a particular species.
I believe I did understand the significance of the claim - I was simply interested in how much further the case in point could be taken.

Other Comments by elvenearth

10. Comment #32686 by Geoff on April 18, 2007 at 2:46 am

 avatar"Sometimes Smarter..." in another way, too; as far as we know, they don't worship imaginary sky-chimps.

Other Comments by Geoff

11. Comment #33722 by devolved on April 21, 2007 at 11:22 am

The article claims, "For some time, paleontologists and evolutionary biologists have known that chimp ancestors were the last line of today's apes to diverge from the branch that led to humans, probably six million, maybe four million years ago." Realy? How do they know that? Surely they should have said, "believed"?

After all no-one can claim to "know" what happened four-six million years ago.

Here's a letter posted on the Richard Dawkins website but no-one has responded to it yet:

Dear Richard

I'm delighted to discover RichardDawkins.Net with the strap-line "A Clear Thinking Oasis".

Obviously when you offer people the opportunity to add their comments there's a high probability that the water will get pretty muddy as all sorts of stuff is likely to get chucked in. And lots of people will want to chuck stuff in. I guess the Oasis represents a form of therapy where folks can work off steam even if their contribution isn't that profound. Still good for you for allowing it to happen.

For some time I've been challenged over the question of how we got here. Are we evolved as you claim or created as your opponents assert? There's obviously a pretty wide spectrum of ideas out there and a lot of us are seeking scientific answers.

However there's one fundamental question that you seem unwilling to address directly and that's just how information is created and increased. I know that you claim that natural selection and mutations and luck increase genetic information but saying it and proving it are hardly the same. Only God speaks things into existence (if He exists) and I'm sure you don't believe that you're God! God forbid. What a delusion that would be! (It could be the title for a book – "The God Delusion")! I wonder if anyone's thought of it?

I've read the 'God Delusion' and you seem to have some respect (but not too much) for creationists because they stick to their guns in believing the Bible to be true. The question they keep asking and everyone keeps dodging is "Where are the examples of information increases?" Let me quote from a creationist website (CMI):

"Natural selection involves merely the shuffling, rearrangement and degeneration of existing genetic information, whereas evolution requires encyclopaedic quantities of new information to be produced by unintelligent, natural processes—information coding for new types of organs, limbs, physiologies, etc."

Now there it is in a nutshell! You see I keep asking people to provide me with examples of 'new information' and all I get is examples of 'the shuffling, rearrangement and degeneration of existing genetic information'.

Of course anyone can say, "Look we're here on the planet and it's very complex so what's your problem, we're surrounded with billions upon billions of examples of highly complex living things." But we both know that's a con because claiming something to be true isn't the same as proving it to be true. And proof is what we're after isn't it? At the heart of the debate you and I have joined is the question "How did we get here?"

Isn't it great that I can write this using a computer. Mine's getting a bit long in the tooth and with several of us in the house trying to use it all at once it can be quite a problem so I've been thinking about buying a new one.

Computer shops are fascinating. Not only can you buy gleaming new black and silver boxes of amazing variety but they come with an astonishing amount of software too (far more than I've got on this pc). Just think about it, I can buy a computer fully charged up with word processing skills, spreadsheets to assist my maths, speech recognition, internet access, and so much more. There's seems to be almost no limit to human ingenuity and the ability to design more and more applications for a computer.

It's a great analogy isn't it! God speaking into existence a fully formed, completely programmed, biologically perfect, morally virus free, walking, talking, thinking computer and calling him 'Adam'. (Mac's 'Apple' is pretty basic when you compare it with God's 'Adam').

But you're going to ruin all that for me aren't you? Of course telling me that design in nature is an illusion is an interesting belief but it is only that, a belief, a presupposition one might subscribe to.

All I need is one example, just one! It shouldn't be too hard a task should it. You don't need to go back into the past. I'll settle for one example of a mutation (or luck) or natural selection creating new genetic information from the present. It must be going on all the time.

Good luck with the website.

Other Comments by devolved

12. Comment #37736 by kieron on May 5, 2007 at 2:53 pm

devolved: Nice try. Richard Dawkins addresses exactly that in his Devil's Chaplain book.

Other Comments by kieron
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password:

Send a letter to the editor of the original media outlet.
letters@nytimes.com