Two Types of Withdraw-to-Eat Movement Related to Food Size in Long-Tailed Macaques (Macaca fascicularis): Insights into the Evolution of the Visual Control of Hand Shaping in Anthropoid Primates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The details of the evolutionary steps in the transition from nonvisual guidance of hand movements for feeding, as displayed by many non-primate species, to visual guidance of hand movements in primates are sparse. Contemporary theory holds that a small-bodied stem primate evolved visual control of the reach to guide a hand to obtain small insects and fruit items from the terminal branches of trees. The subsequent evolution of the visual control of hand and finger shaping movements of the grasp of anthropoids is uncertain. The present study finds that Balinese long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis), video recorded while spontaneously eating at the Sacred Monkey Forest Sanctuary in Ubud in Indonesia, displayed two types of hand movements associated with two types of withdraw movements to place food items in the mouth. Small food items were brought directly to the mouth with hand supination, often with no visual monitoring after grasping. Large food items that protruded from the hand were visually monitored to orient the food item on the initial part of the withdraw but visually disengaged with a head movement and often a blink before the item was placed in the mouth. The results are discussed in relation to the idea that visual information related to orientating food items of varying sizes to an appropriate position in the mouth contributed to the evolution of the visual control of hand shaping skills in anthropoid primates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".