Comparing dogs and great apes in their ability to visually track object transpositions

Knowing that objects continue to exist after disappearing from sight and tracking invisible object displacements are two basic elements of spatial cognition. The current study compares dogs and apes in an invisible transposition task. Food was hidden under one of two cups in full view of the subject. After that both cups were displaced, systematically varying two main factors, whether cups were crossed during displacement and whether the cups were substituted by the other cup or instead cups were moved to new locations. While the apes were successful in all conditions, the dogs had a strong preference to approach the location where they last saw the reward, especially if this location remained filled. In addition, dogs seem to have especial difficulties to track the reward when both containers crossed their path during displacement. These results confirm the substantial difference that exists between great apes and dogs with regard to mental representation abilities required to track the invisible displacements of objects

Is caching the key to exclusion in corvids? The case of carrion crows (Corvus corone corone)

Recently, two corvid species, food-caching ravens and non-caching jackdaws, have been tested in an exclusion performance (EP) task. While the ravens chose by exclusion, the jackdaws did not. Thus, foraging behaviour may affect EP abilities. To investigate this possibility, another food-caching corvid species, the carrion crow (Corvus corone corone), was tested in the same exclusion task. We hid food under one of two cups and subsequently lifted either both cups, or the baited or the un-baited cup. The crows were significantly above chance when both cups were lifted or when only the baited cup was lifted. When the empty cup was lifted, we found considerable inter-individual variation, with some birds having a significant preference for the un-baited but manipulated cup. In a follow-up task, we always provided the birds with the full information about the food location, but manipulated in which order they saw the hiding or the removal of food. Interestingly, they strongly preferred the cup which was manipulated last, even if it did not contain any food. Therefore, we repeated the first experiment but controlled for the movement of the cups. In this case, more crows found the food reliably in the un-baited condition. We conclude that carrion crows are able to choose by exclusion, but local enhancement has a strong influence on their performance and may overshadow potential inferential abilities. However, these findings support the hypothesis that caching might be a key to exclusion in corvids

What You See Is What You Get? Exclusion Performances in Ravens and Keas

BACKGROUND:Among birds, corvids and parrots are prime candidates for advanced cognitive abilities. Still, hardly anything is known about cognitive similarities and dissimilarities between them. Recently, exclusion has gained increasing interest in comparative cognition. To select the correct option in an exclusion task, one option has to be rejected (or excluded) and the correct option may be inferred, which raises the possibility that causal understanding is involved. However, little is yet known about its evolutionary history, as only few species, and mainly mammals, have been studied. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:We tested ravens and keas in a choice task requiring the search for food in two differently shaped tubes. We provided the birds with partial information about the content of one of the two tubes and asked whether they could use this information to infer the location of the hidden food and adjust their searching behaviour accordingly. Additionally, this setup allowed us to investigate whether the birds would appreciate the impact of the shape of the tubes on the visibility of food. The keas chose the baited tube more often than the ravens. However, the ravens applied the more efficient strategy, choosing by exclusion more frequently than the keas. An additional experiment confirmed this, indicating that ravens and keas either differ in their cognitive skills or that they apply them differently. CONCLUSION:To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that corvids and parrots may perform differently in cognitive tasks, highlighting the potential impact of different selection pressures on the cognitive evolution of these large-brained birds