1
|
Regolin L, Loconsole M. Behavioural Methods to Study Cognitive Capacities of Animals. Animals (Basel) 2023; 13:3445. [PMID: 38003062 PMCID: PMC10668706 DOI: 10.3390/ani13223445] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/11/2023] [Accepted: 10/30/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Over the past 20 years, the scientific community has witnessed a growing interest in the comparative study of mental capabilities [...].
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucia Regolin
- Department of General Psychology, University of Padua, 35131 Padua, Italy;
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Vanhooland LC, Szabó A, Bugnyar T, Massen JJM. A comparative study of mirror self-recognition in three corvid species. Anim Cogn 2023; 26:229-248. [PMID: 36173469 PMCID: PMC9876878 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-022-01696-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2022] [Revised: 08/31/2022] [Accepted: 09/03/2022] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Mirror self-recognition (MSR) assessed by the Mark Test has been the staple test for the study of animal self-awareness. When tested in this paradigm, corvid species return discrepant results, with only the Eurasian magpies and the Indian house crow successfully passing the test so far, whereas multiple other corvid species fail. The lack of replicability of these positive results and the large divergence in applied methodologies calls into question whether the observed differences are in fact phylogenetic or methodological, and, if so, which factors facilitate the expression of MSR in some corvids. In this study, we (1) present new results on the self-recognition abilities of common ravens, (2) replicate results of azure-winged magpies, and (3) compare the mirror responses and performances in the mark test of these two corvid species with a third corvid species: carrion crows, previously tested following the same experimental procedure. Our results show interspecies differences in the approach of and the response to the mirror during the mirror exposure phase of the experiment as well as in the subsequent mark test. However, the performances of these species in the Mark Test do not provide any evidence for their ability of self-recognition. Our results add to the ongoing discussion about the convergent evolution of MSR and we advocate for consistent methodologies and procedures in comparing this ability across species to advance this discussion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa-Claire Vanhooland
- Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Djerassiplatz 1, 1030, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Anita Szabó
- Department of Zoology, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Thomas Bugnyar
- Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Djerassiplatz 1, 1030, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jorg J M Massen
- Animal Behaviour and Cognition, Department of Biology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Verspeek J, van Leeuwen EJC, Laméris DW, Staes N, Stevens JMG. Adult bonobos show no prosociality in both prosocial choice task and group service paradigm. PeerJ 2022; 10:e12849. [PMID: 35178297 PMCID: PMC8815371 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.12849] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Previous studies reported contrasting conclusions concerning bonobo prosociality, which are likely due to differences in the experimental design, the social dynamics among subjects and characteristics of the subjects themselves. Two hypotheses have been proposed to explain the occurrence of prosociality in animals: the cooperative breeding hypothesis and the self-domestication hypothesis. While the former predicts low levels of prosociality in bonobos because they are non-cooperative breeders, the latter predicts high levels of prosociality because self-domestication has been proposed to select for high levels of tolerance in this species. Here, we presented a group of thirteen bonobos with two platform food-provisioning tasks: the prosocial choice task (PCT) and the group service paradigm (GSP). The latter has so far never been applied to bonobos. To allow for free choice of participation and partner, we implemented both tasks in a group setting. Like in previous PCT studies, bonobos did not choose the prosocial option more often when a group member could benefit vs not benefit. In the GSP, where food provisioning is costly, only subadult bonobos showed a limited amount of food provisioning, which was much lower than what was previously reported for chimpanzees. In both experiments, adult subjects were highly motivated to obtain rewards for themselves, suggesting that bonobos behaved indifferently to the gains of group members. We suggest that previous positive food-provisioning prosociality results in bonobos are mainly driven by the behaviour of subadult subjects. The lack of prosociality in this study corresponds to the hypothesis that proactive food provisioning co-occurs with cooperative breeding and suggests that proactive prosociality might not be part of the self-domestication syndrome in bonobos.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonas Verspeek
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Edwin J. C. van Leeuwen
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Daan W. Laméris
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Nicky Staes
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Jeroen M. G. Stevens
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium,Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium,SALTO, Agro- and Biotechnology, Odisee University College, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|