The social nature of primate cognition

The hypothesis that the enlarged brain size of the primates was selected for by social, rather than purely ecological, factors has been strongly influential in studies of primate cognition and behaviour over the past two decades. However, the Machiavellian intelligence hypothesis, also known as the social brain hypothesis, tends to emphasize certain traits and behaviours, like exploitation and deception, at the expense of others, such as tolerance and behavioural coordination, and therefore presents only one view of how social life may shape cognition. This review outlines work from other relevant disciplines, including evolutionary economics, cognitive science and neurophysiology, to illustrate how these can be used to build a more general theoretical framework, incorporating notions of embodied and distributed cognition, in which to situate questions concerning the evolution of primate social cognition

Forty years on and still going strong: the use of hominin-cercopithecid comparisons in palaeoanthropology

Hominin-cercopithecid comparisons have been used in palaeoanthropology for over forty years. Fossil cercopithecids can be used as a ‘control group’ to contextualize the adaptations and evolutionary trends of hominins. Observations made on modern cercopithecids can also be applied to questions about human evolution. This article reviews the history of hominin-cercopithecid comparisons, assesses the strengths and weaknesses of cercopithecids as comparators in studies of human evolution, and uses cercopithecid models to explore hominin inter-specific dynamics. Cercopithecids appear to be excellent ecological referents, but may be less good when considering the cognitive abilities and cultural adaptations of hominins. Comparison of cercopithecid and hominin adaptations at Koobi Fora in East Africa indicates that, whereas the cercopithecids were largely grass- or leaf-eating, the hominins occupied a generalist niche, apparently excluding other primate generalist-frugivores. If any of the hominin species at Koobi Fora were sympatric, analogies with modern cercopithecids suggest that inter-specific contact cannot be discounted and may even have been beneficial

A Severe Lack of Evidence Limits Effective Conservation of the World's Primates

Threats to biodiversity are well documented. However, to effectively conserve species and their habitats, we need to know which conservation interventions do (or do not) work. Evidence-based conservation evaluates interventions within a scientific framework. The Conservation Evidence project has summarized thousands of studies testing conservation interventions and compiled these as synopses for various habitats and taxa. In the present article, we analyzed the interventions assessed in the primate synopsis and compared these with other taxa. We found that despite intensive efforts to study primates and the extensive threats they face, less than 1% of primate studies evaluated conservation effectiveness. The studies often lacked quantitative data, failed to undertake postimplementation monitoring of populations or individuals, or implemented several interventions at once. Furthermore, the studies were biased toward specific taxa, geographic regions, and interventions. We describe barriers for testing primate conservation interventions and propose actions to improve the conservation evidence base to protect this endangered and globally important taxon

Primates’ fertilization systems and the evolution of the human brain

Gender relations, Sexual selection, Emotional and rational intelligence, A120, B520, J160, P500,