Investigating Physical Cognition in Rooks, Corvus frugilegus

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
How do emotion and motivation direct executive control? Luiz Pessoa Trends in Cognitive Sciences Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages (April 2009) DOI: /j.tics
Advertisements

Two views of brain function Marcus E. Raichle Trends in Cognitive Sciences Volume 14, Issue 4, Pages (April 2010) DOI: /j.tics
Signal Jamming Mediates Sexual Conflict in a Duetting Bird Joseph A. Tobias, Nathalie Seddon Current Biology Volume 19, Issue 7, Pages (April 2009)
Auguste M.P. von Bayern, Nathan J. Emery  Current Biology 
Chimpanzee culture extends beyond matrilineal family units
Backward Masking and Unmasking Across Saccadic Eye Movements
Animal Vision: Rats Watch the Sky
Eye position predicts what number you have in mind
Volume 27, Issue 23, Pages e4 (December 2017)
Generalizable Learning: Practice Makes Perfect — But at What?
Sensory-Motor Integration: More Variability Reduces Individuality
Volume 26, Issue 14, Pages R650-R652 (July 2016)
Eye–Hand Coordination: Learning a New Trick
Honeybee Vision: In Good Shape for Shape Recognition
Somatosensory Precision in Speech Production
Chimpanzees Trust Their Friends
Volume 21, Issue 20, Pages R837-R838 (October 2011)
Spontaneous Metatool Use by New Caledonian Crows
Animal Cognition: An End to Insight?
Optic Flow Cues Guide Flight in Birds
Infant cognition Current Biology
Comparative Cognition: Rats Pay Back Quid Pro Quo
Visual Attention: Size Matters
Sensitivity to Temporal Reward Structure in Amygdala Neurons
Young Children Do Not Integrate Visual and Haptic Form Information
Quantity Cognition: Numbers, Numerosity, Zero and Mathematics
Volume 26, Issue 14, Pages R650-R652 (July 2016)
Cristina Márquez, Scott M. Rennie, Diana F. Costa, Marta A. Moita 
Volume 23, Issue 7, Pages R265-R266 (April 2013)
Children, but Not Chimpanzees, Prefer to Collaborate
Tamar Gutnick, Ruth A. Byrne, Binyamin Hochner, Michael Kuba 
Volume 27, Issue 23, Pages e4 (December 2017)
What We Know Currently about Mirror Neurons
Optic Flow Cues Guide Flight in Birds
Perception Matches Selectivity in the Human Anterior Color Center
Pig cognition Current Biology
Non-cortical magnitude coding of space and time by pigeons
Spatiotopic Visual Maps Revealed by Saccadic Adaptation in Humans
Thomas S Collett, Paul Graham  Current Biology 
Planar Cell Polarity: Microtubules Make the Connection with Cilia
Daniel Hanus, Josep Call  Current Biology 
Social Dynamics: Knowledgeable Lemurs Gain Status
The social life of corvids
Peng Zhang, Min Bao, Miyoung Kwon, Sheng He, Stephen A. Engel 
Rooks Use Stones to Raise the Water Level to Reach a Floating Worm
Auguste M.P. von Bayern, Nathan J. Emery  Current Biology 
Visual Scene Perception in Navigating Wood Ants
N. Barnsley, J.H. McAuley, R. Mohan, A. Dey, P. Thomas, G.L. Moseley 
Cognitive neural prosthetics
Early Life: Embracing the RNA World
Federica Amici, Filippo Aureli, Josep Call  Current Biology 
Volume 17, Issue 7, Pages (April 2007)
Volume 19, Issue 22, Pages (December 2009)
Marine Biology: New Light on Growth in the Cold
Small RNAs: How Seeds Remember To Obey Their Mother
Daniela Vallentin, Andreas Nieder  Current Biology 
Population Genetics Provides Evidence for Recombination in Giardia
Sound Facilitates Visual Learning
Volume 21, Issue 7, Pages (April 2011)
Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages (February 2011)
Horizontal Gene Transfer: Accidental Inheritance Drives Adaptation
Selective Imitation in Domestic Dogs
David A. McVea, Keir G. Pearson  Current Biology 
A Visual Sense of Number
Jonathan Redshaw, Thomas Suddendorf  Current Biology 
Matthew W. Hahn, Gregory C. Lanzaro  Current Biology 
The social life of corvids
James N. Ingram, Ian S. Howard, J. Randall Flanagan, Daniel M. Wolpert 
Volume 18, Issue 5, Pages R198-R202 (March 2008)
Endosperm Imprinting: A Child Custody Battle?
Presentation transcript:

Investigating Physical Cognition in Rooks, Corvus frugilegus Amanda M. Seed, Sabine Tebbich, Nathan J. Emery, Nicola S. Clayton  Current Biology  Volume 16, Issue 7, Pages 697-701 (April 2006) DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.02.066 Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 The Trap-Tube Test, Which Has Been Used to Test a Variety of Tool-Using Animals, and the Control Task Used in a Number of these Studies to Test for Understanding Current Biology 2006 16, 697-701DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2006.02.066) Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Experimental Apparatus Tubes A and B were used in Experiments 1 and 2, and Tubes C and D were used in Experiment 3. A stick is already inserted into the tube at the start of the trial, and the food is enclosed by clear Perspex discs such that it will move with the stick whichever way it is pulled. Each tube has two “traps” along its length, and each has different solutions depending upon the position of horizontal black discs at the top or bottom of these traps. The arrow shows the path the food will take on a successful trial. Current Biology 2006 16, 697-701DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2006.02.066) Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Results of Experiments 1 and 2 Panel (A) shows those birds that received Tube A in Experiment 1 and Tube B in Experiment 2 (subjects shown by closed symbols: Selvino = diamond, Fonteyn = triangle, Fry = square, and Callas = circle); Panel (B) shows those that received Tube B first (subjects shown by open symbols: Cooper = diamond, Curie = triangle, Guillem = square, and Cooper = circle). The horizontal dotted line in each graph shows chance performance (5 out of 10 trials correct). The vertical lines separate results from different tubes, and the boxes above the x axis show which of the tubes were used. Current Biology 2006 16, 697-701DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2006.02.066) Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Results of Experiment 3 Panel (A) shows those birds that received Tube C and then Tube D; Panel B shows those that received Tube D first. Subjects are shown by the same symbols as used in Figure 3, so that closed symbols show subjects that received Tube A in Experiment 1 and open symbols show subjects that received Tube B. Fonteyn did not learn the first task in 150 trials and therefore did not continue to these transfers. The horizontal dotted line in each graph shows chance performance (5 out of 10 trials correct). The vertical lines separate results from different tubes, and the boxes above the x axis show which of the tubes were used. Current Biology 2006 16, 697-701DOI: (10.1016/j.cub.2006.02.066) Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd Terms and Conditions