Animals that have learned to use tools: what do we know about them?

Are there animals that have learned to use tools? This phenomenon has been recorded multiple times, both in nature and in captive environments, with a purpose evolutionary course for the living being: facilitate the obtaining of food, defense, grooming, entertainment or construction of structures.

Sometimes it is violent for us to recognize that as a species we are not the only ones with such sophisticated cognitive abilities as to manipulate our environment in complex ways. Human society is characterized by a slightly anthropocentric vision, as we tend to translate all natural behavior into human terms and purposes to better understand the processes that surround us.

For this reason, the use of tools in animals is a much more controversial topic than one might imagine, since the definition of the word “tool” in itself is already a challenge. If you want to know more about the exciting world of the cognitive abilities of living beings, read on.

• Related article:"What is Ethology and what is its object of study?"

Animals that have learned to use tools: optimizing the environment

Ethology is the branch of experimental biology and psychology that deals with understand animal behaviors, both in laboratory conditions and in their natural environment. The objectives of this discipline are the study of behavior, instinct, relationships with the environment and the guidelines that guide innate or acquired behaviors in the world of living beings.

This branch is subject to continuous scrutiny, as the interpretation of animal behaviors can be completely biased by the human observing them or the experimental conditions that arise. As much as statistical backups are required to suspect any type of relationship, the reading of them will depend considerably on the eyes of the interpreter.

For example, if the average of the spawning of various females of a species of invertebrate in different areas and those of zone A produce more eggs than those of zone B, there is little to discuss, truth? There appears to be a correlation between the geographic area and the cohort of offspring produced. After discovering this, one can inquire about why: more presence of food, larger females, evolutionary response to more predators, etc.

But, for example, let's put an experiment in which we have two colonies of bees, one that we have disturbed during the last hours by shaking its honeycomb and one that we have not. It turns out that the undisturbed colony is more likely to approach samples with unfamiliar odors, while the one that has been “Threatened” is more cautious and only approaches aromatic sources that it already knows (this experiment, although simplified to extreme, it's real).

How do we interpret this data? Can we say that bees are aware of their own alertness and therefore decide not to take risks? Are we facing a merely evolutionary primal mechanism or is there some complex associated cognitive capacity? Of course, the reading of the results is much more subject to debate than in the previous case.

What we have wanted to underline with these two examples is that the extent of animal behavior depends largely on who sees it and on the parameters measured. Therefore, although it may seem surprising, not all scientists agree on the existence of animals that have learned to use tools. It is not that they deny it completely, but that many cases known to the population would not strictly apply to this definition.

• You may be interested in: "The 7 types of lithic industry: the origins of technology"

What is a tool?

The first stone that we find in the way of registering these behaviors is the very description of the term tool. A fairly extended definition, proposed in a scientific publication in 1980 and modified since then, is the following:

“The external use of an object available in the environment to more effectively alter the shape, position or condition of an object, another organism or the The same person who uses it, when he is the one who holds and manipulates the tool during or before its use and is responsible for its correct and effective orientation. "

As we can see in this rudimentary translation from English, the very concept of a tool has different meanings to take into account. For certain researchers, the use of objects as if they were tools does not constitute a tool in itselfSince humans are the only ones capable of modifying an object enough to be considered a real tool (and at most, other primates).

For example, when a bird uses a piece of bread to attract a fish and later hunt it (real behavior), we cannot define this piece of food as a tool in itself. The general consensus is that it is a “proto-tool”. Continuing with the example of birds, studies have found that birds that use these proto-tools have less developed brains than those that use real tools.

When animals use one tool to obtain another, we are faced with a “meta-tool”. On the other hand, when they use one tool to later use another, we are dealing with a “sequential use of tools”. As we can see, the world of the use of objects in nature is much more complex than one might initially believe.

To keep the train of thought and not to overcomplicate things, we are going to continue with the world of birds. As birds that use "real tools" we have the ravens of New Caledonia (Corvus moneduloides), as they are capable of making sticks as tools from branches and other plantar structures.

It is interesting to know that these tools have a laterality, that is, that are modified according to a specific pattern. The branches are effectively modified in the form of a hook to be used later to obtain beetle larvae in the recesses of the trees. As we can see, the basal structure is modified to generate an instrument that facilitates a complex activity, so it would undoubtedly fall within the strictest definition of "tool".

By presenting this dilemma, examples of tool use in the natural world are called into question. For example, can otters be considered to use tools if they use stones to break the shells of the marine invertebrates they eat? Once this information is exposed, the minimum is to stop and think for a few seconds: Do you modify the stones before using them?

With these questions we do not want to circumscribe or delimit animal behavior from a skeptical point of view, because we only try to express that not everything is as simple as various informative sources try to show. Yes, there are multiple examples of the use of real tools, such as orangutans who make improvised whistles from leaves of trees to warn others of the presence of predators or the manufacture of rudimentary "spears" by chimpanzees to hunt down dams.

In this specific case, the primate must take a branch, tear off the extensions and leave only one and sharpen the end with its teeth. Again, we are facing the actual manufacture of a tool, since the object itself has been modified for a complex purpose. Of course, when we look at orangutans, gorillas and chimpanzees, things change, because complex manipulation of natural resources has been observed on multiple occasions and little doubt remains when it comes to recognizing its ability to make tools.

• You may be interested in: "Theories of human intelligence"

Conclusions

As we can see, the key to understanding animals that have learned to use tools is, first of all, to define what is considered a tool or instrument and what is not.

Things get even more complicated in captive environments, since behaviors that are relatively less common in nature can be recorded., for example, due to the continuous contact between animals that have already learned to use previous form or a greater amount of energy and free time than in the natural ecosystem is absent.

Thus, the use of tools in the animal world may (or may not) be more restricted than initially thought. The purpose of the object, its modification and the manipulation of the living being can be factors conditioning factors for what is considered (or not) according to personal judgment an effective use of tools.

Bibliographic references:

• 10 animals that use tools, sciencedirect.com. Picked up on September 3 in https://www.livescience.com/9761-10-animals-tools.html
• Alcock, J. (1972). The evolution of the use of tools by feeding animals. Evolution, 464-473.
• Haslam, M. (2013). ‘Captivity bias’ in animal tool use and its implications for the evolution of hominin technology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368 (1630), 20120421.
• How do we wrap our minds around bee consciousness? The best of our knowledge. Picked up on September 3 in https://www.ttbook.org/interview/how-do-we-wrap-our-minds-around-bee-consciousness
• Hunt, G. R., Gray, R. D., & Taylor, A. H. (2013). Why is tool use rare in animals. Tool use in animals: cognition and ecology, 89-118.
• Mann, J., & Patterson, E. M. (2013). Tool use by aquatic animals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 368 (1630), 20120424.
• Tool use in birds, convergent evolution of life. Picked up on September 3 in http://www.mapoflife.org/topics/topic_193_Tool-use-in-birds/