Reaching Out for Inaccessible Food Is a Potential Begging Signal in Cooperating Wild-Type Norway Rats, Rattus norvegicus

A multifaceted framework to establish the presence of meaning in non-human communication

Does non-human communication, like language, involve meaning? This question guides our focus through an interdisciplinary review of the theories and terminology used to study meaning across disciplines and species. Until now, it has been difficult to apply the concept of meaning to communication in non-humans. This is partly because of the varied approaches to the study of meaning. Additionally, while there is a scholarly acknowledgement of potential meaning in non-human cognition, there is also scepticism when the topic of communication arises. We organise some of the key literature into a coherent framework that can bridge disciplines and species, to ensure that aspects of meaning are accurately and fairly compared. We clarify the growing view in the literature that, rather than requiring multiple definitions or being split into different types, meaning is a multifaceted yet still unified concept. In so doing, we propose that meaning is an umbrella term. Meaning cannot be summed up with a short definition or list of features, but involves multiple complexities that are outlined in our framework. Specifically, three global facets are needed to describe meaning: a Signal Meaning Facet, an Interactant Meaning Facet, and a Resultant Meaning Facet. Most importantly, we show that such analyses are possible to apply as much to non-humans as to humans. We also emphasise that meaning nuances differ among non-human species, making a dichotomous approach to meaning questionable. Instead, we show that a multifaceted approach to meaning establishes how meaning appears within highly diverse examples of non-human communication, in ways consistent with the phenomenon's presence in human non-verbal communication and language(s). Therefore, without further recourse to 'functional' approaches that circumvent the critical question of whether any non-human meaning exists, we show that the concept of meaning is suitable for evolutionary biologists, behavioural ecologists, and others to study, to establish exactly which species exhibit meaning in their communication and in what ways.

Assessment of help value affects reciprocation in Norway rats

Wild-type Norway rats reciprocate help received in a well-replicated experimental food-giving task, but the criteria to appraise the received help's value are unclear. We tested whether quality or quantity of received help is more important when deciding to return help, and whether partner familiarity and own current need affect this evaluation. We experimentally varied recipients of help's hunger state, and familiar or unfamiliar partners provided either higher caloric food (enhanced quantity; carrots) or food higher in protein and fat (enhanced quality; cheese). Reciprocation of received help was our criterion for the rats' value assessment. Familiarity, food type and hunger state interacted and affected help returned by rats. Rats returned less help to familiar partners than to unfamiliar partners. With unfamiliar partners, rats returned more help to partners that had donated preferred food (cheese) than to partners that had donated less preferred food (carrots), and they returned help earlier if they were satiated and had received cheese. With familiar partners, food-deprived rats that had received cheese returned more help than satiated rats that had received carrots. Our results suggest that Norway rats assess the received help's value based on its quality, their current need and partner familiarity before reciprocating received help.

Family first! Influence of parental investment in Guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) prosocial choices

Literature often assumed that prosocial behaviours (behaviours that benefit others with or without a cost for the actor) would have evolved many species to improve the effectiveness of parental care (Decety and Cowell 2014). While this hypothesis is rarely questioned at a phylogenetic scale, it was never tested at an individual scale to the best of our knowledge. Therefore, we chose to study the impact of effective parental care on prosociality by comparing the prosocial tendencies of Guinea pigs before mating, during mating and after parturition. We conducted Prosocial Choice Tests on three groups of Guinea pigs (males, multiparous females, and nulliparous females). Subjects had to choose between three options: a prosocial option (subject and recipient being rewarded), a selfish option (only subject was rewarded), and a null option (no reward). Our results showed high prosociality towards their mating partner and their young both in male and in female subjects. Males became selfish towards other males after parturition. Among other interesting results, we found a direct reciprocity phenomenon. We also highlighted an ability in our subjects to consider both the identity and relationship shared with the recipient, such as tolerance (enhancing prosociality), dominance rank (being tested with a dominant recipient increasing selfish responses), and its behaviour (begging calls eliciting prosociality, while threatening ones decreasing it), to choose an option. These findings suggested that prosociality could be modulated by many factors and that the constraints and stakes induced by breeding would highly influence prosocial strategies.

When deciding to cooperate by direct reciprocity, Norway rats sometimes benefit from olfactory competence and seem not impaired by insufficient cognitive abilities

Direct reciprocity requires the ability to recognize and memorize social partners, and to remember their previous actions. 'Insufficient cognitive abilities' have been assumed to potentially impair the ability to cooperate by direct reciprocity. Here we compare the propensity of rats to use direct reciprocity with their ability to memorize and recognize sensory cues in a non-social task. Female rats enriched in one of three sensory modalities (visual, olfactory or auditory) performed better in a learning task when they were tested with the specific sensory modality in which they have been enriched. For the cooperation test, during three subsequent reciprocity experiments the rats could provide two partners differing in their previous helpfulness with food. Individuals performing better in the non-social learning task that involved olfactory cues applied direct reciprocity more successfully in one experiment. However, in the experiment preventing visual cues and physical contact, rats applied direct reciprocity rules irrespective of their performance in the learning task with olfactory cues. This indicates that an enhanced olfactory recognition ability, despite being beneficial, is not a prerequisite for the rats' ability to cooperate by direct reciprocity. This might suggest that when rats have all types of information about their social partner, individuals may apply other criteria than the reciprocity decision rule when determining how much help to provide, as for instance coercion. Interestingly, when all individuals are constrained to mostly rely on olfactory memory, individuals apply direct reciprocity independently of their ability to memorize olfactory cues in a non-social context. 'Insufficient cognitive abilities' may thus not be the true reason when direct reciprocity is not observed.