A chimpanzee: our closest relative may be more successful than a human at memory-based tasks. This is according to a study conducted in Japan. The researcher Prof. Tezuro Matsuzawa from Kyoto University founded an association that works to stop intrusive experiments on great apes due to their strong cognition and to settle for psychological experiments
in the British Guardian It tells about an experiment in which a chimpanzee beat a human in a memory-based computer game. In a test conducted, a female chimpanzee named AI and her son Ayumu were shown numbers from 9 to 1 randomly scattered on a computer screen. The task: touch them in ascending order. The difficulty - when the examinee clicked on the number 80, the other numbers were hidden - and the test has now become a kind of memory game. As the difficulty increased, i.e., the time between the appearance of the numbers and their disappearance decreased, his threat showed the same level of accuracy (XNUMX%) with his mother and a human volunteer lagging behind.
The answer to the differences, says researcher Prof. Tetsuro Matsuzawa from Kyoto University, lies in evolution - photographic memory is a feature we no longer needed as humans. The chimpanzee needs it, let's say, to remember the location of fruits on a tree - for example.
Recent studies of the genomes of humans and chimpanzees have revealed how close the two species are: the differences at the DNA level are very small -1.23%. In other words, we are 98.77% chimpanzees, and the genomic difference between the two species is similar to the difference between horses and zebras. In memory tests for example, chimpanzees may achieve better results than humans
Avi Blizovsky, the scientist Published: 29.09.13, 15:12
Human minds are the product of millions of years of evolution, just like the human body, human society and the human genome. Homo sapiens is only one of about 220 species of primates. The comparison between humans and other primate species presents us with perhaps the best way to explain human nature, and allows us to assess the answers to some questions such as what makes humans unique and where humans came from and evolved.
Matsuzawa explains in his article: "I study chimpanzees both in Africa and in Japan. The field work and the laboratory are required at the same time to provide us with the overall picture of the lives and minds of the chimpanzees. I call the field: Cognitive Comparative Science (CCS). This field seeks to investigate the evolutionary origins of human behavior and the human brain by comparing humans with the closest species. The research is characterized by comparative methods. Human subjects and chimpanzees participate in exactly the same tests, use the same devices and follow the same procedures."
Research partner - a 36-year-old female chimpanzee and her son
At the Primate Research Institute at Kyoto University, there is a community of 14 chimpanzees of three different generations who live in an enriched environment, reminiscent of their natural environment. The institute is located in Inuyama near Nagoya in central Japan. Ai is a 36-year-old female chimpanzee and Matsuzawa has been working with her since 1977, when she was one year old. His son is 13 years old.
"Initially my colleague and I focused on language-like skills in chimpanzees. We taught Ai to use visual signs to name objects and colors, we introduced her to the digits that represent the concept of numbers. At the age of five she was able to name objects, then colors and numbers. By touching the appropriate sign printed from computer terminals. Follow-up research by my colleagues and mine covered a number of topics in the field of cognition, visual acuity, shape perception, face recognition, visual matching of objects, movement perception, short-term memory and more," Matsuzawa writes.
Research community in Guinea
A community of 12 three-generation chimpanzees lives in Bussau, in Guinea in West Africa. The institute's researchers have been studying the chimpanzees there for 30 years. Busao's chimpanzees are also known to use a pair of stones as a club and an anvil to crack nuts. "Since 1986, I have visited Busao once a year and studied the development of the change in the technology of using tools. The monkeys undergo training at the age of 4-5 years, but it takes another 5 years until they refine their technological level upon reaching adulthood.
We discovered many examples of tool use in Busao, including 'fishing' for ants with a stick, using leaves to drink water, digging up mushrooms floating in a pond with the help of a flexible stick, and using palm petioles as leaves to crush the top of the tree in order to get to the delicious liquid inside. These tools are essential for the survival of the chimpanzees.
An association for the prevention of intrusive experiments and the rehabilitation of chimpanzees
In 1998 we founded SAGA (Support for African/Asian Great Apes). It is a consortium of people and non-governmental organizations that care for the great apes: chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans. SAGA promoted conservation operations for these species in their natural habitat, and for their enrichment and well-being in captivity, and also allowed non-intrusive experiments to be performed to learn about them.
In the past, chimpanzees were used for biomedical research, for example on AIDS, jaundice and malaria. There are still over 1,500 chimpanzees in European biolabs across the US. In Japan, three pharmaceutical companies used chimpanzees for biomedical research. However, all intrusive studies were stopped as of October 2006 thanks to the SAGA movement. "We are currently establishing a shelter for 79 chimpanzees who participated in biomedical research.
"My dream is that one day humans and chimpanzees will live together - as neighbors and evolutionary cousins.
30 תגובות
http://www.livescience.com/44039-chimpanzees-can-play-video-games-better-than-kindergartners.html?cmpid=514627_20140312_19944124
You will find an interesting discussion on the definition of biological sex here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
Religionists who accept evolution raise all kinds of points, but none of them are plausible.
The truth is that it is not clear to me why they are trying to do this because as soon as you said that there is evolution, you said that the creation story told in the Torah is not true, therefore all the illogical suggestions they make to "save" God do not help their religion which speaks of another God.
Of course they are aware of the problem and therefore they invent all kinds of interpretations based on the assumption that God did not know or did not want to write what really happened and therefore his words need to be interpreted.
skeptic
Not just a joke.. of the denotative type 🙂
point
Stop feeding him or he won't stop.
Miracles
right. Beyond that - he will be ostracized from his community, and probably from his family as well.
There are religious people who accept evolution. One point they make is that God directs evolution. A second point is that man is permitted from the animal - because he has a soul. A third point is morality (without religion there is no concept of "morality").
It's more interesting...
It should be understood that what motivates those infidels who deny evolution is not the truth.
What drives them is a very strong emotion that stems from fear. Fear that if he changed his position then disaster would occur. Something will crash.
And what will collapse? world view, and as a result he will feel humiliated. Disgraced that he lived for years with a wrong worldview. Then he will feel humiliated. And that causes great fear. His pride will do anything just so he doesn't feel humiliated. Even if it is at the price of sacrificing the truth.
Evolution deniers are motivated by the same fear of disgrace. Therefore any scientific debate will be fruitless. The debate should be on the psychological level.
point
I absolutely agree with you. Therefore, it is not clear to me why Assaf and his friends jumped on me...
I'm not just making the point. One of the claims of evolution deniers is that the formation of a new species has never been observed." They have a very clear definition in mind, and this is a problem...
Exact science can have a broad meaning. It requires precision and precise knowledge to understand that a certain definition is not accurate. Therefore, I do not see this as a contradiction. You have to understand that life is complex. And life is not governed by definitions of what is sex and what is not. Life (like everything) is conducted according to the natural mechanisms and they don't care what someone defined or what an unknown person discovered.
point
This is also the definition I know. But - she has several problems, and you mentioned one of them. A second problem is that there are instances of a certain species, completely normal, that cannot breed with each other. And of course there are species that are unisexual. And there are also lizards (and other animals) that know how to reproduce without sex.
I mean - the definition you gave is a bit problematic. It is suitable for everyday use, but it is not suitable, in my opinion, for Assaf's description of zoology as an exact science (it is certainly a science, I argue otherwise!).
I would appreciate a reference at the level of... (like yours).
A biological species is defined as a collection of those individuals that can reproduce among themselves, and naturally they do. There are unnatural situations where even 2 individuals that are not of the same species can reproduce with each other. But this is the exception.
I think this is the biological definition
I asked for a definition because Assaf claims there is a definition, and I don't know what. I ask because I want to know. There is no pretense here.
Asaf.
You said well about miracles. It's not worth arguing with him, he's only a Vahkan.
Miracles
Assaf really understands. And he also explains to you what you don't understand. some respect And a beautiful thing.
Asaf
I asked you a question with the understanding that you understand. Are you disrespecting me now? Where did you direct me? Which list?
If we talk about philosophy, then I don't think that sex is a natural kind. The only definition I found is "the lowest taxonomic level". Is that what you mean?
The concept of "denotative" belongs to philosophy and has nothing to do with zoological classification,
The zoological definition for the species appears in the list I referred to here as well
And also in the RA's responses, and hinted at in your first (confused) response,
Moreover, as a "university graduate" you will be able to find on your own.
Asaf
I understood you ... but now you want to argue, sorry, discuss ... about my name 🙂
And by the way - can you tell me what the definition of sex is? Is there a definition beyond the denotative definition (the list of all species)?
To Yossi
Note ,
Zoology is considered an exact science (although not everything is clear and known),
That is why the definitions for: type and sex are clear and arbitrary (there is no question of "who is right"),
In your first comment you touched exactly on the differences (and confusion) between the zoological classification
and the division of plant or animal diversity developed into different subspecies,
Subspecies (zoologists or botanists) are usually separate populations
living in different environmental conditions,
If the separation lasts long enough, separate species are created,
(then the separate populations belong to the same type),
Subspecies of plants developed (by man) are called varieties,
Subspecies of animals developed (by humans) are called races,
The edible plants developed from the wild cabbage (Brassica oleracea) are indeed varieties,
And the third scientific/Latin name (capitata – Italica – botrytis) is the name of the variety,
As for the wolf (Canis lupus) from which the domestic dogs were developed
All ... all, associated with the same subspecies (Canis lupus familiaris)
And to differentiate between them, race names are given,
Just like people are divided (all of which are a sex symbol) into different races,
As with us, so also with dogs, all breeds can reproduce
and the offspring will be fruitful,
Until the development of genetics, those who could produce fertile offspring were considered
For children of the same sex.
post Scriptum.
Wikipedia is an excellent information tool
But not always accurate.
Maybe we have found secular spirituality? The secret lies in the chimpanzee.
And the amazing achievement is the ability to remember an order of single digits.
Even a camera, which is completely still, remembers the entire image.
Asaf
As long as your opinion is accepted, it's a discussion, I understand.
Where did I get confused?
In the past I also defined the difference between discussion and debate
A discussion took place until the eighth response
The ninth response
the offense discussion for debate (idle)
Too bad
Asaf
I know that of course there is. This is the difference between broccoli and cauliflower. And that's the difference between a Pug and a Great Dane and a Poodle.
That's how I studied at university... and even on Wikipedia it exists (call it a subspecies if you want...)
And where is the confusion in my response?
miracles take note,
The concept of "Zen". does not exist in zoology,
In one of the lists I tried to make order by the sorting method
To avoid the confusion implied by your further comment,
You should find this list or any other reliable source
which explains the differences between the concepts of classification and zoological sorting
Avi Hecht's response can help you in knowing the initial division
(up to type)
Assaf Rosenthal addressed this in one of the articles and called for including the person in the PAN type
We are the only species of the same species in the genus Homo.
There is no exact definition for "type" and "species". The accepted distinction is that different species cannot interbreed. But - members of the same species can't always breed with each other, and different species can't always breed with each other.
And of course in asexual reproduction this definition has no meaning.
I seem to be out of touch with modern taxonomy.
Hominidae -> all great apes and man
Homininae -> without the orangutan
Hominini -> without the gorilla
Homo -> only "we"
The (unsubstantiated) rumors in the circles of biological anthropologists are that this has already been tested - but as rumors go, the story changes - how long the experiment was continued, what exactly was involved, etc.
Regarding the classification we are classified as HOMO as opposed to PAN due to ethnocentrism… no reason…
After the well-known comparison of the genetic similarity between humans and chimpanzees
An interesting statement comes:
….”The genomic difference between the two species is similar to the difference between horses and zebras”…..
The horse and the zebra are classified into the same zoological genus - Equus,
Mating between a horse and a zebra gives rise to a hybrid species (which is not fertile),
Is there a chance that this will also be the result of mating between a human and a chimpanzee?
Today the chimpanzee is classified as Pan and the human as Homo...
two distinct types,
There have already been statements in the past about the possibility of classifying both of them in the same type,
And when the comparison comes to the similarity between a horse and a zebra, the next step is
Testing what would be the result of a pairing between a chimpanzee and a human.
Honestly, this shouldn't surprise us.
Just like there are animals that are faster than us, see in vision ranges we don't see, see better in the dark,
recognize movement from a distance better, animals that create an acoustic image from sound reflections by hearing,
Navigating by the Earth's magnetic field, even navigating the Milky Way, reacting faster than us, smelling better than us, hearing better than us and at ranges we cannot hear, sensing electric fields, the list is very, very long,
This is how we find an expression of this also in the brain capacity of animals in which in some areas they surpass us,
It is possible that even in some of the emotional fields it is found that some animals have created mechanisms that exceed human abilities,
A little humorously, we are reminding a little of the first iPhone, everything was already there, you just had to put it all together,
And like the followers of the iPhone, we also feel that we invented the wheel,
Man is like the amplification of the qualities that already exist in the animal kingdom,
The links on the way to strengthening the cognitive abilities are mostly found in the fossil map and this strengthens the feeling of uniqueness and our sense of disconnection from the animal kingdom, something that is especially reflected in the various religious philosophies.
Does this mean humans can breed with chimpanzees?