Putting the cart before the horse? The origin of information donation.

Heintz & Scott-Phillips propose that the partner choice ecology of our ancestors required Gricean cognitive pragmatics for reputation management, which caused a tendency toward showing and expecting prosociality that subsequently scaffolded language evolution. Here, we suggest a cognitively leaner explanation that is more consistent with comparative data and posits that prosociality and eventually language evolved along with cooperative breeding.

Problem-solving in groups of common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus): more than the sum of its parts.

Human hypercooperativity and the emergence of division of labor enables us to solve problems not only effectively within a group but also collectively. Collective problem-solving occurs when groups perform better than the additive performance of separate individuals. Currently, it is unknown whether this is unique to humans. To investigate the evolutionary origin of collective problem-solving and potential precursors, we propose a continuum of group effects on problem-solving, from simple to complex ones, eventually culminating in collective problem-solving. We tested captive common marmosets with a series of problem-solving tasks, either alone or in a group. To test whether the performance of a group was more than the sum of its parts, we compared real groups to virtual groups (pooled scores of animals tested alone). Marmosets in real groups were both more likely to solve problems than marmosets within the virtual groups and to do so faster. Although individuals within real groups approached the problem faster, a reduction in neophobia was not sufficient to explain the greater success. Success within real groups arose because animals showed higher perseverance, especially after a fellow group member had found the solution in complex tasks. These results are consistent with the idea that group problem-solving evolved alongside a continuum, with performance improving beyond baseline as societies move from social tolerance to opportunities for diffusion of information to active exchange of information. We suggest that increasing interdependence and the adoption of cooperative breeding pushed our ancestors up this scale.

Primate tails: Ancestral state reconstruction and determinants of interspecific variation in primate tail length.

OBJECTIVE: Living primates vary considerably in tail length-body size relation, ranging from tailless species to those where the tail is more than twice as long as the body. Because the general pattern and determinants of tail evolution remain incompletely known, we reconstructed evolutionary changes in relative tail length across all primates and sought to explain interspecific variation in this trait. METHODS: We combined data on tail length, head-body length, intermembral index (IMI), habitat use, locomotion type, and range latitude for 340 species from published sources. We reconstructed the evolution of relative tail length to identify all independent cases of regime shifts on a primate phylogeny, using several methods based on Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) models. Accounting for phylogeny, we also examined the effects of habitat, locomotion type, distance from the equator and IMI on interspecific variation in tail length-body size relation. RESULTS: Primate tail length is not sexually dimorphic. A phylogenetic reconstruction allowing multiple optima explains the observed regime shifts best. During the evolutionary history of primates, relative tail length changed 50 times under an OU model. Specifically, relative tail length increased 26 and decreased 24 times. Most of these changes occurred among Old World primates. Among the variables tested here, interspecific variation in IMI and the difference between leaping and non-leaping locomotion explained interspecific variation in relative tail length: Evolutionary decreases in relative tail length are generally associated with an increase in IMI and an absence of leaping behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Regime shifts for relative tail length in living primates occurred in concert with fundamental changes in IMI and a change from leaping to non-leaping locomotion, or vice versa. Exceptions from this general pattern are linked to the presence of a prehensile tail or specialized foraging strategies. Thus, the primate tail appears to have evolved in functional coordination with limb proportions, presumably to assist body balance.