Nathan J. Emery

Effects of experience and social context on prospective caching strategies by scrub jays.

Social life has costs associated with competition for resources such as food. Food storing may reduce this competition as the food can be collected quickly and hidden elsewhere; however, it is a risky strategy because caches can be pilfered by others. Scrub jays (Aphelocoma coerulescens) remember ‘what’, ‘where’ and ‘when’ they cached. Like other corvids, they remember where conspecifics have cached, pilfering them when given the opportunity, but may also adjust their own caching strategies to minimize potential pilfering. To test this, jays were allowed to cache either in private (when the other birds view was obscured) or while a conspecific was watching, and then recover their caches in private. Here we show that jays with prior experience of pilfering another birds caches subsequently re-cached food in new cache sites during recovery trials, but only when they had been observed caching. Jays without pilfering experience did not, even though they had observed other jays caching. Our results suggest that jays relate information about their previous experience as a pilferer to the possibility of future stealing by another bird, and modify their caching strategy accordingly.

Cognitive ornithology: the evolution of avian intelligence

Comparative psychologists interested in the evolution of intelligence have focused their attention on social primates, whereas birds tend to be used as models of associative learning. However, corvids and parrots, which have forebrains relatively the same size as apes, live in complex social groups and have a long developmental period before becoming independent, have demonstrated ape-like intelligence. Although, ornithologists have documented thousands of hours observing birds in their natural habitat, they have focused their attention on avian behaviour and ecology, rather than intelligence. This review discusses recent studies of avian cognition contrasting two different approaches; the anthropocentric approach and the adaptive specialization approach. It is argued that the most productive method is to combine the two approaches. This is discussed with respects to recent investigations of two supposedly unique aspects of human cognition; episodic memory and theory of mind. In reviewing the evidence for avian intelligence, corvids and parrots appear to be cognitively superior to other birds and in many cases even apes. This suggests that complex cognition has evolved in species with very different brains through a process of convergent evolution rather than shared ancestry, although the notion that birds and mammals may share common neural connectivity patterns is discussed.

Cognitive adaptations of social bonding in birds

The ‘social intelligence hypothesis’ was originally conceived to explain how primates may have evolved their superior intellect and large brains when compared with other animals. Although some birds such as corvids may be intellectually comparable to apes, the same relationship between sociality and brain size seen in primates has not been found for birds, possibly suggesting a role for other non-social factors. But bird sociality is different from primate sociality. Most monkeys and apes form stable groups, whereas most birds are monogamous, and only form large flocks outside of the breeding season. Some birds form lifelong pair bonds and these species tend to have the largest brains relative to body size. Some of these species are known for their intellectual abilities (e.g. corvids and parrots), while others are not (e.g. geese and albatrosses). Although socio-ecological factors may explain some of the differences in brain size and intelligence between corvids/parrots and geese/albatrosses, we predict that the type and quality of the bonded relationship is also critical. Indeed, we present empirical evidence that rook and jackdaw partnerships resemble primate and dolphin alliances. Although social interactions within a pair may seem simple on the surface, we argue that cognition may play an important role in the maintenance of long-term relationships, something we name as ‘relationship intelligence’.

The effects of bilateral lesions of the amygdala on dyadic social interactions in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta)

The role of the amygdala in dyadic social interactions of adult rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) was assessed after bilateral ibotenic acid lesions. Social, nonsocial, and spatial behaviors of amygdalectomized and control monkeys were assessed in 3 dyadic experiments: constrained, unconstrained, and round robin. Lesions produced extensive bilateral damage to the amygdala. Across all experiments, the amygdalectomized monkeys demonstrated increased social affiliation, decreased anxiety, and increased confidence compared with control monkeys, particularly during early encounters. Normal subjects also demonstrated increased social affiliation toward the amygdalectomized subjects. These results indicate that amygdala lesions in adult monkeys lead to a decrease in the species-normal reluctance to immediately engage a novel conspecific in social behavior. The altered behavior of the amygdalectomized monkeys may have induced the increased social interactions from their normal companions. This is contrary to the idea that amygdalectomy produces a decrease in social interaction and increased aggression from conspecifics.

Gaze following and joint attention in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).

Gaze and attention direction provide important sources of social information for primates. Behavioral studies show that chimpanzees spontaneously follow human gaze direction. By contrast, non-ape species such as macaques fail to follow gaze cues. The authors investigated the reactions of rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) to attention cues of conspecifics. Two subjects were presented with videotaped images of a stimulus monkey with its attention directed to 1 of 2 identical objects. Analysis of eye movements revealed that both subjects inspected the target (object or position attended by the stimulus monkey) more often than the distractor (nonattended object or position). These results provide evidence that rhesus monkeys follow gaze and use the attention cues of other monkeys to orient their own attention to objects.

Insightful problem solving and creative tool modification by captive nontool-using rooks

The ability to use tools has been suggested to indicate advanced physical cognition in animals. Here we show that rooks, a member of the corvid family that do not appear to use tools in the wild are capable of insightful problem solving related to sophisticated tool use, including spontaneously modifying and using a variety of tools, shaping hooks out of wire, and using a series of tools in a sequence to gain a reward. It is remarkable that a species that does not use tools in the wild appears to possess an understanding of tools rivaling habitual tool users such as New Caledonian crows and chimpanzees. Our findings suggest that the ability to represent tools may be a domain-general cognitive capacity rather than an adaptive specialization and questions the relationship between physical intelligence and wild tool use.

How does cognition evolve? Phylogenetic comparative psychology

Now more than ever animal studies have the potential to test hypotheses regarding how cognition evolves. Comparative psychologists have developed new techniques to probe the cognitive mechanisms underlying animal behavior, and they have become increasingly skillful at adapting methodologies to test multiple species. Meanwhile, evolutionary biologists have generated quantitative approaches to investigate the phylogenetic distribution and function of phenotypic traits, including cognition. In particular, phylogenetic methods can quantitatively (1) test whether specific cognitive abilities are correlated with life history (e.g., lifespan), morphology (e.g., brain size), or socio-ecological variables (e.g., social system), (2) measure how strongly phylogenetic relatedness predicts the distribution of cognitive skills across species, and (3) estimate the ancestral state of a given cognitive trait using measures of cognitive performance from extant species. Phylogenetic methods can also be used to guide the selection of species comparisons that offer the strongest tests of a priori predictions of cognitive evolutionary hypotheses (i.e., phylogenetic targeting). Here, we explain how an integration of comparative psychology and evolutionary biology will answer a host of questions regarding the phylogenetic distribution and history of cognitive traits, as well as the evolutionary processes that drove their evolution.

Investigating Physical Cognition in Rooks, Corvus frugilegus

Although animals (particularly tool-users) are capable of solving physical tasks in the laboratory , the degree to which they understand them in terms of their underlying physical forces is a matter of contention. Here, using a new paradigm, the two-trap tube task, we report the performance of non-tool-using rooks. In contrast to the low success rates of previous studies using trap-tube problems , seven out of eight rooks solved the initial task, and did so rapidly. Instead of the usual, conceptually flawed control, we used a series of novel transfer tasks to test for understanding. All seven transferred their solution across a change in stimuli. However, six out of seven were unable to transfer to two further tasks, which did not share any one visual constant. One female was able to solve these further transfer tasks. Her result is suggestive evidence that rooks are capable of sophisticated physical cognition, if not through an understanding of unobservable forces , perhaps through rule abstraction. Our results highlight the need to investigate cognitive mechanisms other than causal understanding in studying animal physical cognition.

Postconflict Third-Party Affiliation in Rooks, Corvus frugilegus

Conflict features in the lives of many animal species and induces social stress mediated by glucocorticoid hormones [1]. Postconflict affiliation, between former opponents (reconciliation) or between former opponents and a bystander (third-party affiliation), has been suggested as a behavioral mechanism for reducing such stress [2], but has been studied almost exclusively in primates [3]. As with many primates, several bird species live in social groups and form affiliative relationships [4]. Do these distantly related animals also use affiliative behavior to offset the costs of conflict? We studied postconflict affiliation in a captive group of rooks. Unlike polygamous primates, monogamous rooks did not reconcile with former opponents. However, we found clear evidence of third-party affiliation after conflicts. Both initiators and targets of aggression engaged in third-party affiliation with a social partner and employed a specific behavior, bill twining, during the postconflict period. Both former aggressors and uninvolved third parties initiated affiliative contacts. Despite the long history of evolutionary divergence, the pattern of third-party affiliation in rooks is strikingly similar to that observed in tolerant primate species. Furthermore, the absence of reconciliation in rooks makes sense in light of the species differences in social systems.

Cooperative problem solving in rooks (Corvus frugilegus)

Recent work has shown that captive rooks, like chimpanzees and other primates, develop cooperative alliances with their conspecifics. Furthermore, the pressures hypothesized to have favoured social intelligence in primates also apply to corvids. We tested cooperative problem-solving in rooks to compare their performance and cognition with primates. Without training, eight rooks quickly solved a problem in which two individuals had to pull both ends of a string simultaneously in order to pull in a food platform. Similar to chimpanzees and capuchin monkeys, performance was better when within-dyad tolerance levels were higher. In contrast to chimpanzees, rooks did not delay acting on the apparatus while their partner gained access to the test room. Furthermore, given a choice between an apparatus that could be operated individually over one that required the action of two individuals, four out of six individuals showed no preference. These results may indicate that cooperation in chimpanzees is underpinned by more complex cognitive processes than that in rooks. Such a difference may arise from the fact that while both chimpanzees and rooks form cooperative alliances, chimpanzees, but not rooks, live in a variable social network made up of competitive and cooperative relationships.