Right handedness of Homo heidelbergensis from Sima de los Huesos (Atapuerca, Spain) 500,000 years ago

Handedness is a product of brain specialization, which in turn seems to be responsible for the higher cognitive capabilities of humans, such as language and technology. Handedness in living humans is well established and shows the highest degree of manual specialization. Studies on hand laterality in nonhuman primates, particularly in chimpanzees, remain a matter of controversy as results tend to vary depending on factors such as the tasks performed and the environment in which the individuals live. Studies in several disciplines have attempted to determine where in the course of human evolution handedness established itself, with evidence collected from sources such as paleoneurological analyses, stone tool flaking, zooarchaeological studies and dental wear analyses, the last one of which have proven the most reliable source of information. Here we report an experimental and paleoanthropological study on hand laterality of a sample of 28 hominids from Sima de los Huesos (Atapuerca, Spain), dated at about 500,000 years ago, and compare our results with dental microwear analysis in other fossil samples such as that from Krapina (Croatia), as well as modern traditional societies. Our results indicate that European Middle Pleistocene Homo heidelbergensis was already as right-handed as modern populations.     

Hand preferences in captive orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus)

The strength of the evidence for population-level handedness in the great apes is a topic of considerable debate, yet there have been few studies of handedness in orangutans. We conducted a study of manual lateralization in a captive group of eight orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) ranking the degrees of manual preference according to a defined framework. We analyzed five behavioral patterns: eat (one- and two-handed), make/modify tool, oral tool-use, and manual tool-use. Although some individuals showed significant manual preferences for one or more tasks, at the group-level both one-handed and two-handed eating, oral tool-use, and make/modify tool were ranked at level 1 (unlateralized). Manual tool-use was ranked at level 2, with four subjects demonstrating significant hand preferences, but no group-level bias to the right or left. Four subjects also showed hand specialization to the right or left across several tasks. These results are consistent with most previous studies of manual preference in orangutans. The emergence of manual lateralization in orangutans may relate to more complex manipulative tasks. We hypothesize that more challenging manual tasks elicit stronger hand preferences.     

Ant fishing by wild chimpanzees is not lateralised

Right-dominant handedness is unique and universal in Homo sapiens, suggesting that it is a highly derived trait. Our nearest living relations, chimpanzees, show lateralised hand preference when using tools, but not when otherwise manipulating objects. We report the first contrary data, that is, non-lateralised tool-use, for ant fishing as done in the Mahale Mountains of Tanzania. Unlike nut cracking, termite fishing, and fruit pounding, as seen elsewhere, in which most individuals are either significantly or wholly left- or right-biassed, ant fishers are mostly ambilateral. The clue to this exception lies in arboreality; all other patterns of chimpanzee elementary technology are done on the ground. Arboreal tool use usually requires not only that one hand be used to hold the tool, but also that the other hand gives postural support. When the supporting hand is fatigued, then it must be relieved by the other. Terrestrial tool use entails no such trading off. To test the hypothesis, we compared frequency of hand changing with the incidence of major hand support, and found them to be significantly positively correlated. The evolutionary transition from arboreality to terrestriality may have been a key enabler for the origins of human laterality.     

Influence of the task on hand preference: individual differences among gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla)

The degree of task complexity and bimanual complementarity have been proposed as factors affecting lateralization strength in humans. However, a large number of studies have demonstrated group-level lateral hand bias for different manual activities in numerous non-human primate species. However, no study has tested the effects that a variety of tasks may have in inducing differences in hand preference. Here, we aim to test if 3 adult gorillas exhibited a greater hand preference bias performing 4 tasks of varying complexity: grasping small versus large foods, proto-tool use task and tool use task involving greater visuospatial requirements. We found that (1) the complexity of the task does not necessarily induce a right-handed bias and (2) a subject can be right-handed for a complex task and left-handed for another one. These results, complemented by many publications on hand preference in non-human primates, reveal a great variability in hand preference, which makes it very difficult to deduce any details of hominin handedness with artefacts.     

Does the Complexity of the Task Influence Manual Laterality in De Brazza’s Monkeys (Cercopithecus neglectus)?

We assessed the manual preferences of 12 De Brazza's monkeys ( Cercopithecus neglectus ) in spontaneous feeding situations and in two different coordinated bimanual tasks that were not visually guided. We recorded the hand used by each subject for 22 spontaneous activities, hand and digits use while extracting peanut butter from a hollow tube (tube task) and the hand used to extract candies from hanging plastic balls (ball task). Spontaneous activities revealed individual manual preferences but no population-level biases. For both experimental tasks, all subjects were lateralized in their hand use. We found a left bias at the group level for the tube task, but no group-level asymmetry for the ball task. Experimental tasks induced greater strength of laterality than did spontaneous activities. Although the size of our sample did not allow us to draw any conclusions concerning manual preference at the population level, this study stresses the importance of coordinated bimanual tasks to reveal manual laterality in non-human primates.     

Is Human Handedness Universal? Ethological Analyses from Three Traditional Cultures

Right-handedness in Homo sapiens is claimed to be qualitatively different from that of other primates, at species level, and to be universal across all cultures. Ethnographic indicators are sparse, however, being mostly indirect rather than direct observations of selected motor patterns. Ethological study of hand use, i.e. observation of a wide range of everyday behavioural patterns performed spontaneously, is missing. We coded such manual activity from cinematic archives of three traditional societies: G/wi San of Botswana, Himba of Namibia and Yanomamö of Venezuela. Results showed a consistent but weak right-hand dominance across these three preliterate cultures. Most individuals showed mixed-, rather than right-handedness, irrespective of whether or not object manipulation was involved. The notable exception was tool use, which was markedly right-handed, and only precision-gripping tool use was normally performed exclusively with the right hand. Most questionnaires that measure handedness focus on precision tool use (and so are likely to be biased accordingly) rather than on more comprehensive ethological measures that include non-object-manipulatory, self-directed and socially communicative patterns of behaviour.     

Population-level right-handedness for a coordinated bimanual task in naturalistic housed chimpanzees: replication and extension in 114 animals from Zambia and Spain

Recently, many studies have been conducted on manual laterality in chimpanzees. Nevertheless, whether nonhuman primates exhibit population-level handedness remains a topic of considerable debate. One of the behaviors studied has been bimanual coordinated actions. Although recent studies have highlighted that captive chimpanzees show handedness at population level for these tasks, some authors have questioned the validity and consistency of these results. The first reason has been the humanization of the samples. The second one has been that the results refer to animals in American biomedical centers and the studies were conducted by the same team [WD Hopkins et al.]. This article aims to assess the laterality in bimanual coordination (tube task) activities in animals housed in an intermediate environment (Chimfunshi, Zambia). This has been conducted by replicating previous studies on similar samples (Mona Foundation, Spain), and then by extending the results to chimpanzees housed in intermediate settings. Individuals were evaluated through four experimental sessions (tests). Results indicated that 86% of the Chimfunshi sample was lateralized (48% RH, 38% LH). Furthermore, the sample showed population-level right-handedness in the mean handedness index, in Test 1, Test 2, and the first half of the study (Test 112). Rearing experience did not have an influence on handpreference. Taken together, the two sample (intermediate settings: Chimfunshi and Mona) results indicate a clear right-handedness. In conclusion, this replication and extension shows that (1) the Mona and Chimfunshi chimpanzees are right-handed in certain conditions, (2) the results are consistent with those obtained by Hopkins in captive settings, (3) the humanization of the samples does not affect manual laterality, (4) females are right-handed at population-level, but not males, and (5) these results reinforce the fact that the complexity of the task plays a dominant role in the expression of hand laterality among chimpanzees.     

Behavioral laterality in captive bonobos (Pan paniscus): Replication and extension

We report observational data on behavioral laterality in 10 captive bonobos (Pan paniscus)at the San Diego Zoo. The unimanual measures include carrying, leading limb in locomotion, self-touching, face-touching, reaching, and gestures. We also recorded bimanual feeding in these subjects. A significant population level left-hand bias exists for carrying. Right-hand biases occur for leading limb in locomotion and gestures. During bimanual feeding, the bonobos hold food items with the left hand while feeding with the right hand. Overall, bonobos exhibit behavioral asymmetries that are similar to previous findings in other pongid ape species. The asymmetries in gestures and bimanual feeding represent novel findings with theoretical implications for the origins of tool use and language.     

Behavioral laterality in captive bonobos (Pan paniscus): Replication and extension

We report observational data on behavioral laterality in 10 captive bonobos (Pan paniscus)at the San Diego Zoo. The unimanual measures include carrying, leading limb in locomotion, self-touching, face-touching, reaching, and gestures. We also recorded bimanual feeding in these subjects. A significant population level left-hand bias exists for carrying. Right-hand biases occur for leading limb in locomotion and gestures. During bimanual feeding, the bonobos hold food items with the left hand while feeding with the right hand. Overall, bonobos exhibit behavioral asymmetries that are similar to previous findings in other pongid ape species. The asymmetries in gestures and bimanual feeding represent novel findings with theoretical implications for the origins of tool use and language.     

Principles and levels of laterality in unimanual and bimanual stone handling patterns by Japanese macaques

The preferential use of one hand over the other is considered the primary behavioral expression of structural and functional asymmetry in cerebral structures, which is a decisive factor in human evolution. We present the first analysis of manual laterality in a form of object play—stone handling (SH) behavior—in a free-ranging group of Japanese macaques. Defined as a stone-directed manipulative activity, and comprised of multiple one-handed SH patterns (e.g., grabbing a stone in one hand and cradling it against its chest), as well as coordinated two-handed SH patterns with manual role differentiation (e.g., holding a stone with one hand and rubbing it with the other), SH behavior is a good candidate for the study of hand lateralization. We systematically followed the methodological framework developed by McGrew and Marchant (1997) to measure and analyze the presence, strength, and direction of manual preference in the performance of SH behavior and in various SH patterns, both at the individual and group level. Some individuals showed a significant manual lateral bias on a single SH pattern (hand preference), whereas others showed consistency in laterality across all or most of the SH patterns they performed (hand specialization). At the group level, we found that, although their collective distribution of left versus right remained random, most subjects were either significantly but incompletely lateralized, or completely lateralized within particular SH patterns (pattern specialization), but not across all SH patterns (no handedness for SH behavior as a whole). As predicted by the task-complexity model, hand specialization and handedness were stronger in the coordinated bimanual SH patterns than in the unimanual patterns. We discuss the implications of our findings for the evolution of manual preferences in noninstrumental object manipulation versus stone tool use in nonhuman primates and hominins.     

Hand preferences in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus), and orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) in food-reaching and other daily activities

We observed 36 captive great apes [31 chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes),2 bonobos (Pan paniscus), and3 orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus)]reaching for items of food and engaging in other spontaneous behaviors. We consider circumstantial factors that could influence the preferred choice of one hand or the other. Most of the subjects (81%) showed a significant hand preference in food reaching that is consistent in directionality with the hand preferences that they showed during other spontaneous behaviors. The results show that the postural adjustment required when carrying out an action seems to influence directly the expression of manual laterality in individuals. Moreover, the results indicate the possible existence of a relationship between maturational factors and persistence in directionality of hand preferences.     

Using the Tools at Hand: Manual Laterality and Elementary Technology in Cebus spp. and Pan spp.

Cebus and Pan appear to be a remarkable example of evolutionary convergence in behavioral ecology. We examine their apparently analogous solutions to problems posed by laterality of hand function and elementary technology. We scrutinize appropriate published data in a meta-analysis, focusing on Cebus apella and C. capucinus and on Pan paniscus and P. troglodytes. We compare behavioral data in terms of captive versus wild, and tool use versus non-tool use, but notable gaps exist in the data, especially for bonobos. Cebus and Pan spp. are equivalent tool users in captivity, but chimpanzees are notably more extensively so in nature. For hand preference, captive bonobos and wild and captive chimpanzees show ambipreference for non-tool-use patterns. For both Cebus spp. and Pan spp., there is a tendency for individuals to be committed exclusively to one hand or the other for tool use. The data for laterality of hand function fit consistently into the five-level model proposed by McGrew and Marchant (1996).     

Hand Preferences in Different Tasks by Tufted Capuchins (Cebus apella)

We examined hand preferences in 25 tufted capuchins (Cebus apella) in three tasks. The hole task involved a single action of reaching for food in a hole. The horizontal panel and the vertical panel tasks required the alignment of two apertures, by moving or lifting a panel, to reach for food in a hole. We found a significant group-level right-hand preference for reaching actions in the hole and in the horizontal panel tasks, but not in the vertical panel task, in which the food retrieval implied the complementary use of both hands. No significant hand bias emerged for moving or lifting actions with high visuospatial components. There is a stronger hand preference in more complex manual activity—coordinated bimanual hand use for food retrieval—than in other unimanual measures. We discuss the results in the context of previous reports on primate laterality.     

Laterality in Maternal Cradling and Infant Positional Biases: Implications for the Development and Evolution of Hand Preferences in Nonhuman Primates

Left-sided maternal cradling has been widely reported in human populations. In this paper, I review the evidence of laterality in maternal cradling and infant positional biases in non-human primates. The review revealed some evidence of population-left sided cradling in great apes but little consistency in bias was found among Old and New World monkeys. Very little data have been reported in prosimians. I further describe how asymmetries in either maternal cradling or infant positional biases may explain individual and species differences in hand preference.     

Chimpanzee tool technology in the Goualougo Triangle, Republic of Congo

With the exception of humans, chimpanzees show the most diverse and complex tool-using repertoires of all extant species. Specific tool repertoires differ between wild chimpanzee populations, but no apparent genetic or environmental factors have emerged as definitive forces shaping variation between populations. However, identification of such patterns has likely been hindered by a lack of information from chimpanzee taxa residing in central Africa. We report our observations of the technological system of chimpanzees in the Goualougo Triangle, located in the Republic of Congo, which is the first study to compile a complete tool repertoire from the Lower Guinean subspecies of chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes troglodytes). Between 1999 and 2006, we documented the tool use of chimpanzees by direct observations, remote video monitoring, and collections of tool assemblages. We observed 22 different types of tool behavior, almost half of which were habitual (shown repeatedly by several individuals) or customary (shown by most members of at least one age-sex class). Several behaviors considered universals among chimpanzees were confirmed in this population, but we also report the first observations of known individuals using tools to perforate termite nests, puncture termite nests, pound for honey, and use leafy twigs for rain cover. Tool behavior in this chimpanzee population ranged from simple tasks to hierarchical sequences. We report three different tool sets and a high degree of tool-material selectivity for particular tasks, which are otherwise rare in wild chimpanzees. Chimpanzees in the Goualougo Triangle are shown to have one of the largest and most complex tool repertoires reported in wild chimpanzee populations. We highlight new insights from this chimpanzee population to our understanding of ape technological systems and evolutionary models of tool-using behavior.     

Manual Laterality for Simple Reaching and Bimanual Coordinated Task in Naturalistic Housed <Emphasis Type="Italic">Pan troglodytes</Emphasis>

Researchers have shown renewed interest in the study of manual lateralization in chimpanzees. Currently there is no consensus confirming the presence or absence of manual dominance at a species level, mainly for populations in the wild and in semicaptivity. We aimed to evaluate the manual laterality in a group of chimpanzees in an intermediate setting (semicaptivity) via 2 tasks: one simple and unimanual (simple reaching) and the other complex and bimanual (tube task). We replicated the same experiments from Hopkins in a new and different sample of chimpanzees. In simple reaching, the hand is used to gather food and the type of grip and the posture are evaluated. The tube task assesses the hand used to extract food from the tube and the method of extraction (digital or instrumental). Through the handedness index we observed that the subjects show clear and strong individual preferences for both tasks (100% lateralized subjects in the tube task; 86% in simple reaching), although we did not detect population preferences for any of the tasks. However, considering both tasks jointly (multiple evaluation), it was possible to detect, for the first time, skilled manual dominance at a group level in semicaptive chimpanzees in one multitask index and borderline significance in a second multitask index.     

Bipedal tool use strengthens chimpanzee hand preferences

The degree to which non-human primate behavior is lateralized, at either individual or population levels, remains controversial. We investigated the relationship between hand preference and posture during tool use in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) during bipedal tool use. We experimentally induced tool use in a supported bipedal posture, an unsupported bipedal posture, and a seated posture. Neither bipedal tool use nor these supported conditions have been previously evaluated in apes. The hypotheses tested were 1) bipedal posture will increase the strength of hand preference, and 2) a bipedal stance, without the use of one hand for support, will elicit a right hand preference. Results supported the first, but not the second hypothesis: bipedalism induced the subjects to become more lateralized, but not in any particular direction. Instead, it appears that subtle pre-existing lateral biases, to either the right or left, were emphasized with increasing postural demands. This result has interesting implications for theories of the evolution of tool use and bipedalism, as the combination of bipedalism and tool use may have helped drive extreme lateralization in modern humans, but cannot alone account for the preponderance of right-handedness.     

Chimpanzee right-handedness reconsidered: Evaluating the evidence with funnel plots

Evidence for population-level right-handedness in nonhuman primates seems inconsistent and contradictory, and many hypotheses have been advanced to account for this volatility. Funnel plots (scatter plots of percent right-hand use vs. sample size) offer a straightforward graphical technique for assessing: 1) the strength and consistency of handedness, 2) whether variability is consistent with normal sampling variation, and 3) how likely reports of statistically significant handedness might have arisen due to chance (i.e., type I error). They are informative for both within- and among-population variation. Reexamination of within-population variation from a detailed and widely cited study reporting significant population-level right-handedness in 140 individual captive chimpanzees (Hopkins [1994] Dev. Psychobiol. 27:395-407) revealed several puzzling patterns: 1) funnel plots showed higher percent right-hand use among individuals for which fewer observations were recorded, 2) when individuals with fewer than 25 observations were excluded, statistical support for population-level right-handedness either became marginal (P = 0.043, when computed as average percent use of the right hand) or disappeared (P = 0.62, when computed as proportion of individuals using the right hand more than the left, whether they did so significantly or not), and 3) the proportion of statistically ambilateral chimpanzees actually increased with increasing number of observations per individual, rather than decreased as would be expected for true population-level right-handedness. In addition, funnel plots of among-population variation from an earlier meta-analysis (McGrew and Marchant [1997] Yrbk. Phys. Anthropol. 40:201-232) suggested that the four reports of significant right-handedness, out of 37 estimates from 14 studies, were likely those that achieved statistical significance simply due to chance. Funnel plots, and the more refined statistical tests they suggest, confirm that the current evidence for population-level right-handedness in chimpanzees remains equivocal.     

Evolution of the gibbon subgenera inferred from cytochrome b DNA sequence data

DNA sequences for the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene from the four extant gibbon subgenera are described. The data confirm that the gibbon subgenera evolved from a common hylobatid ancestor and suggest that they diverged from each other after the divergence of the extant African great ape species. The cytochrome b gene does not resolve the evolutionary relationships between the gibbon subgenera themselves.     

Front Cover

This review highlights the scientific advances concerning the origins of human right‐handedness and language (speech and gestures). The comparative approach we adopted provides evidence that research on human and non‐human animals’ behavioural asymmetries helps understand the processes that lead to the strong human left‐hemisphere specialisation. We review four major non‐mutually exclusive environmental factors that are likely to have shaped the evolution of human and non‐human primates’ manual asymmetry: socioecological lifestyle, postural characteristics, task‐level complexity and tool use. We hypothesise the following scenario for the evolutionary origins of human right‐handedness: the right‐direction of modern humans’ manual laterality would have emerged from our ecological (terrestrial) and social (multilevel system) lifestyle; then, it would have been strengthened by the gradual adoption of the bipedal stance associated with bipedal locomotion, and the increasing level of complexity of our daily tasks including bimanual coordinated actions and tool use. Although hemispheric functional lateralisation has been shaped through evolution, reports indicate that many factors and their mutual intertwinement can modulate human and non‐human primates’ manual laterality throughout their life cycle: genetic and environmental factors, mainly individual sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., age, sex and rank), behavioural characteristics (e.g., gesture per se and gestural sensory modality) and context‐related characteristics (e.g., emotional context and position of target). These environmental (evolutionary and life cycle) factors could also have influenced primates’ manual asymmetry indirectly through epigenetic modifications. All these findings led us to propose the hypothesis of a multicausal origin of human right‐handedness.