↓ Skip to main content

Do chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) use cleavers and anvils to fracture Treculia africana fruits? Preliminary data on a new form of percussive technology

Overview of attention for article published in Primates, December 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
Title
Do chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) use cleavers and anvils to fracture Treculia africana fruits? Preliminary data on a new form of percussive technology
Published in
Primates, December 2009
DOI 10.1007/s10329-009-0178-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathelijne Koops, William C. McGrew, Tetsuro Matsuzawa

Abstract

Wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) are renowned for their use of tools in activities ranging from foraging to social interactions. Different populations across Africa vary in their tool use repertoires, giving rise to cultural variation. We report a new type of percussive technology in food processing by chimpanzees in the Nimba Mountains, Guinea: Treculia fracturing. Chimpanzees appear to use stone and wooden "cleavers" as tools, as well as stone outcrop "anvils" as substrate to fracture the large and fibrous fruits of Treculia africana, a rare but prized food source. This newly described form of percussive technology is distinctive, as the apparent aim is not to extract an embedded food item, as is the case in nut cracking, baobab smashing, or pestle pounding, but rather to reduce a large food item to manageably sized pieces. Furthermore, these preliminary data provide the first evidence of chimpanzees using two types of percussive technology for the same purpose.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 86 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 23%
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Professor 7 8%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 7 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 37%
Psychology 13 14%
Arts and Humanities 10 11%
Social Sciences 9 10%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 9 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,441,132
of 23,202,641 outputs
Outputs from Primates
#108
of 1,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,283
of 167,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Primates
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,202,641 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,024 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 167,093 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them