Spatio‐temporal complexity of chimpanzee food: How cognitive adaptations can counteract the ephemeral nature of ripe fruit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecological complexity has been proposed to play a crucial role in primate brain-size evolution. However, detailed quantification of ecological complexity is still limited. Here we assess the spatio-temporal distribution of tropical fruits and young leaves, two primary chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) foods, focusing on the predictability of their availability in individual trees. Using up to 20 years of information on monthly availability of young leaf, unripe and ripe fruit in plant species consumed by chimpanzees from tropical forests in East, Central, and West Africa, we estimated: (1) the forest-wide frequency of occurrence of each food type and (2) the predictability of finding ripe fruit-bearing trees, focusing on the timing, frequency, and amount of ripe fruit present. In all three forests, at least half of all encountered trees belonged to species that chimpanzees were known to feed on. However, the proportion of these trees bearing young leaves and fruit fluctuated widely between months. Ripe fruit was the most ephemeral food source, and trees that had more than half of their crown filled were at least nine times scarcer than other trees. In old growth forests only one large ripe fruit crop was on average encountered per 10 km. High levels of inter-individual variation in the number of months that fruit was present existed, and in some extreme cases individuals bore ripe fruit more than seven times as often as conspecifics. Some species showed substantially less variation in such ripe fruit production frequencies and fruit quantity than others. We hypothesize that chimpanzees employ a suite of cognitive mechanisms, including abilities to: (1) generalize or classify food trees; (2) remember the relative metrics of quantity and frequency of fruit production across years; and (3) flexibly plan return times to feeding trees to optimize high-energy food consumption in individual trees, and efficient travel between them. Am. J. Primatol. 78:626-645, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".