Chimps’ Love for Crystals Could Help Us Understand Our Own Ancestors’ Fascination with These Stones

A chimp named Toti observes the crystal – credit, GarcĂ­a-Ruiz et al., 2026, according to CC 4.0. license

Scientists have found that chimpanzees are attracted to crystals, seem to value them, want to keep them where they sleep, and can easily distinguish any stone that shines or glitters from others that don’t.

The researchers were hoping to understand whether our own species’ long documented appreciation (bordering on obsession) with crystals, gems, and precious metals, extends even further back down our evolutionary timeline.

The findings must be taken with several grains of sodium chloride crystal, but may open up a fascinating field of study into the origins of value.

Maybe you’ve experienced this: news comes out about a large diamond or ruby selling at auction for the same price as a house, and you or a friend have a brief moment of wondering, “why?”

Similarly, maybe you subscribe, or at least sympathize, with Warren Buffet’s long-held views on gold—namely that it’s nothing but a shiny rock—”a barbarous relic,” as the Oracle of Omaha famously said.

But even so, there’s something about the appeal of shiny rocks that clearly transcends logic, and that’s been true not only for the 5,500 year history of gold’s use as money, but for likely our entire existence.

Crystals have repeatedly been found at archaeological sites alongside Homo remains. Evidence shows hominins have been collecting these stones for as long as 780,000 years. Yet, we know that our ancestors did not use them as weapons, tools, or even jewelry. So why did they collect them at all?

Something about these stones made them desirable, even when they weren’t used for anything, and hoping to understand why, Spanish scientists conducted an experiment with 9 encultured chimps at a primate rescue center.

Encultured means that the animals have had extensive contact with humans, and is the first reason to hold one’s horses regarding scientific conclusions, but the results of the experiment nevertheless left the scientists “amazed.”

“We were pleasantly surprised by how strong and seemingly natural the chimpanzees’ attraction to crystals was,” said lead author Juan Manuel GarcĂ­a-Ruiz, a professor in San Sebastian in crystallography. “This suggests that sensitivity to such objects may have deep evolutionary roots.”

Modern humans diverged from chimps between 6 and 7 million years ago, so we share substantial genetic and behavioral similarities. To find out if fascination with crystals is one of them, the researchers provided two groups of chimpanzees (Manuela, Guillermo, Yvan, Yaki, and Toti in group one and Gombe, LulĂş, Pascual, and Sandy in group two) with access to crystals.

A chimp named Yvan spent more than 15 minutes inspecting a small crystal – credit GarcĂ­a-Ruiz et al., 2026, according to CC 4.0. license

In the first experiment, a large quartz crystal—called the monolith—was placed on a platform, along with a normal rock of similar size. While initially both objects caught the chimps’ attention, soon the crystal was preferred and the rock disregarded. Once they had removed it from the platform, all chimps inspected the crystal, rotating and tilting it so they could view it from specific angles. Yvan then picked up the crystal and decisively carried it to their hay-lined sleeping huts.

A second experiment showed that the chimps could identify and select smaller quartz crystals—similar in size to those found in hominin site excavations—from a pile of 20 rounded pebbles within seconds.

When pyrite (Fool’s Gold) and calcite crystals, which have different shapes than quartz crystals, were added to the pile, chimps still were able to pick out crystal-type stones.

“The chimpanzees began to study the crystals’ transparency with extreme curiosity, holding them up to eye level and looking through them,” GarcĂ­a-Ruiz said. The animals then immediately, like the monolith experiment, took them back to their dormitories.

Chimps repeatedly examined the crystals for hours. Sandy, for example, carried pebbles and crystals in her mouth to a wooden platform where she separated them.

“She separated the 3 crystal types, which themselves differed in transparency, symmetry, and luster, from all the pebbles. This ability to recognize crystals despite their differences amazed us,” GarcĂ­a-Ruiz said.

The authors pointed out that chimps don’t usually use their mouths to carry objects, so this could mean they were hiding them, a behavior consistent with treating the crystals as valuable, the team pointed out. It could, however, also mean they were testing to see if they were edible, but maybe not.

Another behavior by the chimps demonstrated the potential that they understood a value proposition in the crystals: that in order to get them back, the researchers had to barter for them, with substantially more pounds of food then the crystal. If indeed they were testing to see if it were edible, the amount of food they demanded in return seems strange.

Philosophically, the food trade experiment mirrors the classical value paradox of gems and precious metals.

One can’t eat a gemstone or gold coin, yet they cost far more than bread. Starving to death, one would trade every gemstone on Earth for a loaf of bread, so why do we assign them so much value? Based on how many bananas and how much yogurt GarcĂ­a-Ruiz and his team had to offer, it could be that chimpanzees fall into that same paradox.

An interesting hypothesis as to why the chimps found the crystals interesting is their shape.

Crystals are the only natural polyhedral objects, meaning the only natural solids with many flat surfaces. When early humans tried to make sense of their environment, their cognitive processes might have been drawn to patterns that were unlike what they knew.

The clouds, trees, mountains, animals, and rivers of the natural world surrounding our ancestors were defined by curvature and ramification, so few items had straight lines and flat surfaces.

The combined observations from the experiments identified that both the transparency and the shape as alluring properties to the chimps. It might have been the same qualities attracting early humans to these rocks.

However, the fact that the chimps had long become accustomed to living with humans should, the researchers note, be considered a limiting factor in interpreting anything conclusively from the studies. Ideally, GarcĂ­a-Ruiz said, the experiment should be replicated with wild apes, and preferably not only with Chimps, but also bonobos and gorillas.

Michael Haslam, an archaeologist with Historic Environment Scotland, told the New York Times that the great apes aren’t the only animals that value crystals: some birds have been known to collect them. Bowerbirds, fascinating birds that will decorate their nests with all sorts of objects, have been documented arranging quartz crystals around the perimeter of their nest to attract females.The gemstones of our marketplaces today are just certain kinds of scarcer crystals that are cut and polished, and there’s every reason to suspect that if the Hope Diamond were placed in front of Sandy, or the male bowerbird, they’d behave exactly the same. Chimps’ Love for Crystals Could Help Us Understand Our Own Ancestors’ Fascination with These Stones
Read More........

The future remains bleak for corals – but not all reefs are doomed

 
Christopher Cornwall, CC BY-NC-ND
Christopher Cornwall, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington and Orlando Timmerman, University of Cambridge

A recent report on global tipping points warned that coral reefs face widespread dieback and have reached a point from which they cannot recover.

But in our new research, we show this might not be the case for some reefs if corals can gain tolerance to rising temperatures, or if we can cut greenhouse gas emissions and restore reefs with heat-tolerant corals at scale.

Nevertheless, the outlook likely remains bleak.

 
All coral reefs are under threat but some may be more tolerant to warming waters. Christopher Cornwall, CC BY-NC-ND

Coral reefs provide habitat for thousands of other species in tropical oceans. They deliver economic value through fisheries and tourism and provide shoreline protection from storm surges and extreme weather by dampening the impact of waves.

However, coral reefs are vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Our study combines previously published assessments of climate impacts on different coral reefs and reviews the scientific consensus to examine how long reef structures could persist as climate change intensifies.

Ocean warming, acidification, darkening and deoxygenation all threaten the persistence of coral reefs. Ocean warming brings marine heatwaves, which are the leading cause of mass coral bleaching that has led to a global decline in coral cover.

Marine heatwaves have already led to a global decline in coral reefs. Christopher Cornwall, CC BY-NC-ND

Corals are animals that house microalgae within their tissues that provide sugar in exchange for nitrogen. When temperatures become too hot, corals expel these symbiotic microalgae, leaving behind white skeletons.

Ocean acidification reduces the ability of corals to build their skeletons through a process called calcification. Warming, darkening and deoxygenation can also reduce calcification.

When corals expel their symbiotic algae, all that remains are bleached skeletons. Chris Perry, CC BY-NC-ND

Coral reefs are built by adding calcium carbonate, coming mostly from corals but also coralline algae and other calcareous seaweeds. But as the ocean’s pH (a measure of acidity) is reduced, processes called bio-erosion and dissolution act to remove calcium carbonate.

Our meta-analysis examined how climate change affects the calcification and bio-erosion of coral reefs and we then applied these results to a global data set of reef growth.

There is no scientific consensus on which organisms will build future coral reefs. We explore four most likely scenarios:

1. Present-day extreme reefs represent the future of coral reefs. These are locations where temperatures are already warmer, waters are becoming more acidic and oxygen has dropped to conditions similar to those expected at the end of the century. These reefs are dominated by coralline algae and slow-growing heat-resistant corals.

Some reefs already experience conditions expected at the end of the century. Steeve Comeau, CC BY-NC-ND

2. Presently degraded reefs take over future reefs. These reefs are dominated by bio-eroders such as sponges and sea urchins and have low coral cover.

3. Corals can gain heat tolerance to an extent that keeps pace with low to moderate greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. Under these scenarios, only about 36% of global corals would be lost and there would be a moderate reduction in growth. These heat-tolerant reefs are dominated by faster growing corals with symbiotic microalgae that can evolve heat tolerance.

4. Reefs where restoration practices include using heat-tolerant corals that can then disperse to other regions. These restored reefs would have lower coral cover in remote regions lacking restoration or with unsuccessful restoration practices. This kind of reef restoration would need to cover half of global coral reefs to maintain net growth – an unlikely scenario.

We found coral reefs transition to net erosion under all scenarios, even under low to moderate greenhouse gas emissions, meaning they are dissolving or being eaten faster than they can grow. Only reefs with heat-tolerant corals could prevent this from occurring.

The next step for the scientific community is to determine which reefs can persist in the future using global efforts to combine information. The major issues is that we are missing measurements from large parts of the Pacific, and we do not know how deoxygenation or coastal darkening will impact coral reefs. The processes of reef bioerosion and dissolution are also poorly described.

Although the climate has been altered to the point of threatening the future survival of coral reefs, their fate is not doomed yet if we act now.

Another question is how long reef structures will persist after living corals are removed. We do not have an answer yet. It will take global efforts to rapidly obtain these measurements to better manage and protect coral reefs before climate change intensifies.

It is up to governments everywhere, including New Zealand, to better support these initiatives before it is too late.The Conversation

Christopher Cornwall, Lecturer in Marine Biology, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington and Orlando Timmerman, Doctoral Candidate in Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More........