Tool use behavior in three wild bonobo communities at Kokolopori.

Comparative studies on tool technologies in extant primates, especially in our closest living relatives, offer a window into the evolutionary foundations of tool use in hominins. Whereas chimpanzee tool technology is well studied across populations, the scarcity of described tool technology in wild populations of our other closest living relative, the bonobo, is a mystery. Here we provide a first report of the tool use repertoire of the Kokolopori bonobos and describe in detail the use of leaf-umbrellas during rainfall, with the aim to improve our knowledge of bonobo tool use capacity in the wild. The tool use repertoire of the Kokolopori bonobos was most similar to that of the nearby population of Wamba and comprised eight behaviors, none in a foraging context. Further, over a 6-month period we documented 44 instances of leaf-umbrella use by 22 individuals from three communities, suggesting that this behavior is habitual. Most leaf-umbrella tool users were adult females, and we observed a nonadult using a leaf-umbrella on only a single occasion. While the study and theory of tool technologies is often based on the use of tools in foraging tasks, tool use in bonobos typically occurs in nonforaging contexts across populations. Therefore, incorporating both foraging and nonforaging contexts into our theoretical framework is essential if we wish to advance our understanding of the evolutionary trajectories of tool technology in humans.

Variations in the microbiome due to storage preservatives are not large enough to obscure variations due to factors such as host population, host species, body site, and captivity.

The study of the primate microbiome is critical in understanding the role of the microbial community in the host organism. To be able to isolate the main factors responsible for the differences observed in microbiomes within and between individuals, confounding factors due to technical variations need to be removed. To determine whether alterations due to preservatives outweigh differences due to factors such as host population, host species, body site, and habitat, we tested three methods (no preservative, 96% ethanol, and RNAlater) for preserving wild chimpanzee (fecal), wild lemur (fecal), wild vervet monkey (rectal, oral, nasal, otic, vaginal, and penile), and captive vervet monkey (rectal) samples. All samples were stored below - 20°C (short term) at the end of the field day and then at - 80°C until DNA extraction. Using 16S rRNA gene sequencing, we show a significant preservative effect on microbiota composition and diversity. Samples stored in ethanol and RNAlater appear to be less different compared with samples not stored in any preservative (none). Our differential analysis revealed significantly higher amounts of Enterococcaceae and Family XI in no preservative samples, Prevotellaceae and Spirochaetaceae in ethanol and RNAlater preserved samples, Oligosphaeraceae in ethanol-preserved samples, and Defluviitaleaceae in RNAlater preserved samples. While these preservative effects on the microbiome are not large enough to remove or outweigh the differences arising from biological factors (e.g., host species, body site, and habitat differences) they may promote misleading interpretations if they have large enough effect sizes compared to the biological factors (e.g., host population).

Flash Expansion Threshold in Whirligig Swarms.

In the selfish herd hypothesis, prey animals move toward each other to avoid the likelihood of being selected by a predator. However, many grouped animals move away from each other the moment before a predator attacks. Very little is known about this phenomenon, called flash expansion, such as whether it is triggered by one individual or a threshold and how information is transferred between group members. We performed a controlled experiment with whirligig beetles in which the ratio of sighted to unsighted individuals was systematically varied and emergent flash expansion was measured. Specifically, we examined: the percentage of individuals in a group that startled, the resulting group area, and the longevity of the flash expansion. We found that one or two sighted beetles in a group of 24 was not enough to cause a flash expansion after a predator stimulus, but four sighted beetles usually initiated a flash expansion. Also, the more beetles that were sighted the larger the resulting group area and the longer duration of the flash expansion. We conclude that flash expansion is best described as a threshold event whose adaptive value is to prevent energetically costly false alarms while quickly mobilizing an emergent predator avoidance response. This is one of the first controlled experiments of flash expansion, an important emergent property that has applications to understanding collective motion in swarms, schools, flocks, and human crowds. Also, our study is a convincing demonstration of social contagion, how the actions of one individual can pass through a group.