How have DNA and other technologies improved the research of Jane Goodall and other primates? New technologies and advances in the area of ​​field research have enabled biologists and primatologists to analyze information more effectively and efficiently. Through the non-invasive collection of fecal samples, researchers are able to extract and analyze DNA to help determine individual characteristics and population dynamics. In addition to DNA, fecal samples also contain hormones and parasites that help determine the overall health of the depositor (Newton-Fisher NE, 2010). Other technologies include the use of geographic information systems that allow chimpanzee ranges to be mapped, and satellite imagery is used to visualize deforestation of selected areas (Goodall, 2002). Has Jane Goodall's research found evidence of tool-making by chimpanzees? Is man the only species capable of building the instrument? How do you correlate this with human culture? Humans are not the only species with the ability to create tools. Early in her research, Jane Goodall observed an older male chimpanzee, she named him David Greybeard. Through his observation of David, he witnessed two forms of tool use. The first was the use of grass as a tool to extract termites from their mounds. The second was the making of an instrument by stripping leaves from a twig, modifying it for the same purpose. When Louis Leakey heard this, he wrote to her “Now we must redefine the instrument, redefine man, or exclude chimpanzees as human beings” (Goodall, 2002). In this regard there is a precise correlation between humans and chimpanzees. Human culture involves behaviors learned through observation, imitation and practice, tool use with chimpanzees shows the same capacity for learned behaviors...... middle of paper ...... urnal of Physical Anthropology, 417-428.Suddenforf , T. (2009). The evolution of primate visual self-recognition: Evidence for absence in lesser apes. Proceedings: Biological Sciences, 1671-1677. Retrieved May 2, 2014, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/30244994?ref=search-gateway:81407c811d684607878e4295bbbf261a>Works CitedDavid Chelazzi, Piero Baglioni. Nanosciences for the conservation of works of art. London: RSC Publishing, 2013. Print.Lovgren, Stefan. Can art make nanotechnology easier to understand? December 23, 2003. Web. May 3, 2014. .Smithsonian. This 1,600-year-old chalice shows that the Romans were pioneers of nanotechnology. nd Web. May 2, 2014.Wang, Zhong L. What is nanotechnology. and web. May 2 2014. .