Tennie Claudio, O'Malley Robert C, Gilby Ian C
School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Center for the Advanced Study of Hominid Paleobiology, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
J Hum Evol. 2014 Jun;71:38-45. doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2014.02.015. Epub 2014 Apr 2.
Understanding the benefits and costs of acquiring and consuming different forms of animal matter by primates is critical for identifying the selective pressures responsible for increased meat consumption in the hominin lineage. Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) are unusual among primates in the amount of vertebrate prey they consume. Still, surprisingly little is known about the nutritional benefits of eating meat for this species. In order to understand why chimpanzees eat vertebrates, it is critical to consider the relative benefits and costs of other types of faunivory - including invertebrates. Although we lack specific nutritional data on the flesh and organs of chimpanzee prey, the macronutrient profiles of insects and wild vertebrate meat are generally comparable on a gram-to-gram basis. There are currently very few data on the micronutrient (vitamin and mineral) content of meat consumed by chimpanzees. With few exceptions, the advantages of hunting vertebrate prey include year-round availability, rapid acquisition of larger packages and reduced handling/processing time (once prey are encountered or detected). The disadvantages of hunting vertebrate prey include high potential acquisition costs per unit time (energy expenditure and risk of injury) and greater contest competition with conspecifics. Acquiring an equivalent mass of invertebrates (to match even a small scrap of meat) is possible, but typically takes more time. Furthermore, in contrast to vertebrate prey, some insect resources are effectively available only at certain times of the year. Here we identify the critical data needed to test our hypothesis that meat scraps may have a higher (or at least comparable) net benefit:cost ratio than insect prey. This would support the 'meat scrap' hypothesis as an explanation for why chimpanzees hunt in groups even when doing so does not maximize an individual's energetic gain.
了解灵长类动物获取和食用不同形式动物物质的益处和成本,对于确定导致人类谱系中肉类消费增加的选择压力至关重要。黑猩猩(Pan troglodytes)在灵长类动物中,其食用的脊椎动物猎物数量非同寻常。然而,令人惊讶的是,对于该物种而言,吃肉的营养益处却鲜为人知。为了理解黑猩猩为何食用脊椎动物,关键在于考虑其他类型食动物性食物(包括无脊椎动物)的相对益处和成本。尽管我们缺乏关于黑猩猩猎物的肉和器官的具体营养数据,但昆虫和野生脊椎动物肉的宏量营养素概况在每克基础上通常具有可比性。目前关于黑猩猩食用肉类的微量营养素(维生素和矿物质)含量的数据非常少。除了少数例外,捕食脊椎动物猎物的优势包括全年可得、能快速获取较大的食物量以及减少处理/加工时间(一旦遇到或发现猎物)。捕食脊椎动物猎物的劣势包括单位时间内潜在的高获取成本(能量消耗和受伤风险)以及与同种个体的竞争更激烈。获取同等质量的无脊椎动物(即使只相当于一小片肉)是可能的,但通常需要更多时间。此外,与脊椎动物猎物不同,一些昆虫资源仅在一年中的特定时间有效可得。在此,我们确定了检验我们的假设所需的关键数据,即肉屑可能比昆虫猎物具有更高(或至少相当)的净收益:成本比。这将支持“肉屑”假说,作为解释黑猩猩为何即使群体狩猎并不能使个体能量获取最大化时仍进行群体狩猎的原因。