Giraffes go for more: a quantity discrimination study in giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis).
Journal
Animal cognition
ISSN: 1435-9456
Titre abrégé: Anim Cogn
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9814573
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
received:
10
07
2020
accepted:
14
10
2020
revised:
01
10
2020
pubmed:
1
11
2020
medline:
20
5
2021
entrez:
31
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Many species, including humans, rely on an ability to differentiate between quantities to make decisions about social relationships, territories, and food. This study is the first to investigate whether giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis) are able to select the larger of two sets of quantities in different conditions, and how size and density affect these decisions. In Task 1, we presented five captive giraffes with two sets containing a different quantity of identical foods items. In Tasks 2 and 3, we also modified the size and density of the food reward distribution. The results showed that giraffes (i) can successfully make quantity judgments following Weber's law, (ii) can reliably rely on size to maximize their food income, and (iii) are more successful when comparing sparser than denser distributions. More studies on different taxa are needed to understand whether specific selective pressures have favored the evolution of these skills in certain taxa.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33128196
doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01442-8
pii: 10.1007/s10071-020-01442-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
483-495Subventions
Organisme : Fundacion zoo Barcelona
ID : 2016/2017
Références
Abramson JZ, Paulina Soto D, Beatriz Zapata S, Lloreda MVH (2018) Spatial perseveration error by alpacas (Vicugna pacos) in an A-not-B detour task. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-018-1170-6
doi: 10.1007/s10071-018-1170-6
pubmed: 29488112
Agrillo C, Bisazza A (2018) Understanding the origin of number sense: a review of fish studies. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 373:20160511
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0511
Agrillo C, Miletto Petrazzini ME, Bisazza A (2014) Numerical acuity of fish is improved in the presence of moving targets, but only in the subitizing range. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-013-0663-6
doi: 10.1007/s10071-013-0663-6
pubmed: 24859818
Allïk J, Tuulmets T (1991) Occupancy model of perceived numerosity. Percept Psychophys. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205986
doi: 10.3758/BF03205986
pubmed: 2030927
Allik J, Tuulmets T (1993) Perceived numerosity of spatiotemporal events. Percept Psychophys. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206789
doi: 10.3758/BF03206789
pubmed: 8134243
Aureli F, Schaffner CMCM, Boesch C et al (2008) Fission-fusion dynamics: new research frameworks. Curr Anthropol. https://doi.org/10.1086/586708
doi: 10.1086/586708
Barth H, Kanwisher N, Spelke E (2003) The construction of large number representations in adults. Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00178-6
doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00178-6
pubmed: 12485738
Beran MJ (2017) Quantitative cognition. APA handbook of comparative psychology: perception, learning, and cognition. American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., pp 553–577
doi: 10.1037/0000012-025
Beran MJ, Parrish AE (2016) Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) treat small and large numbers of items similarly during a relative quantity judgment task. Psychon Bull Rev. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0986-1
doi: 10.3758/s13423-015-0986-1
pubmed: 26689808
pmcid: 4916038
Beran MJ, Evans TA, Harris EH (2008) Perception of food amounts by chimpanzees based on the number, size, contour length and visibility of items. Anim Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.10.035
doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.10.035
pubmed: 19412322
pmcid: 2493292
Berry PSM, Bercovitch FB (2017) Seasonal and geographical influences on the feeding ecology of giraffes in the Luangwa Valley, Zambia: 1973–2014. Afr J Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12324
doi: 10.1111/aje.12324
Bertamini M, Guest M, Vallortigara G et al (2018) The effect of clustering on perceived quantity in humans (Homo sapiens) and in chicks (Gallus gallus). J Comp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000114
doi: 10.1037/com0000114
pubmed: 29708361
Bond ML, Lee DE, Ozgul A, König B (2019) Fission–fusion dynamics of a megaherbivore are driven by ecological, anthropogenic, temporal, and social factors. Oecologia. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04485-y
doi: 10.1007/s00442-019-04485-y
pubmed: 31451928
Boysen ST, Berntson GG (1995) Responses to quantity: perceptual versus cognitive mechanisms in chimpanzees (Pan Troglodytes). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.21.1.82
doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.21.1.82
pubmed: 7844508
Boysen ST, Berntson GG, Mukobi KL (2001) Size matters: impact of item size and quantity on array choice by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.115.1.106
doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.115.1.106
pubmed: 11594499
Brannon EM, Roitman JD (2003) Nonverbal representations of time and number in animals and human infants. In: Meck W (ed) Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Riedel J et al (2006) Making inferences about the location of hidden food: social dog, causal ape. J Comp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.120.1.38
doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.120.1.38
pubmed: 16551163
Butterworth B, Gallistel CR, Vallortigara G (2018) Introduction: The origins of numerical abilities. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 373:20160507
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2016.0507
Cacchione T, Hrubesch C, Call J (2014) Phylogenetic roots of quantity processing: apes do not rely on object indexing to process quantities. Cogn Dev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2014.04.002
doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2014.04.002
Caicoya ÁL, Amici F, Ensenyat C, Colell M (2019) Object permanence in Giraffa camelopardalis: first steps in Giraffes’ physical cognition. J Comp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000142
doi: 10.1037/com0000142
pubmed: 30372108
Cantlon JF (2012) Math, monkeys, and the developing brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109:10725–10732
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1201893109
Cantlon JF, Brannon EM (2006) Shared system for ordering small and large numbers in monkeys and humans. Psychol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01719.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01719.x
pubmed: 16683927
Cantlon JF, Safford KE, Brannon EM (2010) Spontaneous analog number representations in 3-year-old children. Dev Sci. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00887.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00887.x
pubmed: 20136925
pmcid: 2819667
Capaldi EJ, Miller DJ, Alptekin S (1989) Multiple-food-unit-incentive effect: nonconservation of weight of food reward by rats. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.15.1.75
doi: 10.1037/0097-7403.15.1.75
Cordes S, Gelman R, Gallistel CR, Whalen J (2001) Variability signatures distinguish verbal from nonverbal counting for both large and small numbers. Psychon Bull Rev. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196206
doi: 10.3758/BF03196206
pubmed: 11848588
Deacon F, Bercovitch FB (2018) Movement patterns and herd dynamics among South African giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis giraffa). Afr J Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/aje.12514
doi: 10.1111/aje.12514
Dehaene S (1992) Varieties of numerical abilities. Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90049-N
doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90049-N
pubmed: 1511583
Feigenson L, Carey S, Hauser M (2002) The representations underlying infants’ choice of more: object files versus analog magnitudes. Psychol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00427
doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00427
pubmed: 11933999
Gallistel CR, Gelman R (1992) Preverbal and verbal counting and computation. Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(92)90050-R
doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90050-R
pubmed: 1511586
Gallistel CR, Gelman R (2000) Non-verbal numerical cognition: from reals to integers. Trends Cogn Sci 4:59–65
doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01424-2
Gómez-Laplaza LM, Gerlai R (2011) Spontaneous discrimination of small quantities: shoaling preferences in angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare). Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-011-0392-7
doi: 10.1007/s10071-011-0392-7
pubmed: 21409443
Gómez-Laplaza LM, Gerlai R (2013) Quantification abilities in angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare): the influence of continuous variables. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0578-7
doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0578-7
pubmed: 23161214
Gómez-Laplaza LM, Gerlai R (2020) Food density and preferred quantity: discrimination of small and large numbers in angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare). Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-020-01355-6
doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01355-6
pubmed: 32009216
Gómez-Laplaza LM, Caicoya ÁL, Gerlai R (2017) Quantity discrimination in angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare) is maintained after a 30-s retention interval in the large but not in the small number range. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1104-8
doi: 10.1007/s10071-017-1104-8
pubmed: 28620776
Gómez-Laplaza LM, Romero L, Gerlai R (2019) The role of item size on choosing contrasted food quantities in angelfish (Pterophyllum scalare). Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-51753-1
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-51753-1
pubmed: 31653899
pmcid: 6814702
Graïc JM, Peruffo A, Ballarin C, Cozzi B (2017) The brain of the giraffe (Giraffa Camelopardalis): surface configuration, encephalization quotient, and analysis of the existing literature. Anat Rec. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.23593
doi: 10.1002/ar.23593
Hare B, Tomasello M (2005) Human-like social skills in dogs? Trends Cogn Sci 9:439–444
doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.07.003
Hauser MD, Carey S, Hauser LB (2000) Spontaneous number representation in semi-free-ranging rhesus monkeys. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1078
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1078
Henschel M, Reitzle M, Haun D (2016) Hans is clever after all—large number discrimination and intuitive statistics in domestic horses (Equus caballus). Friedrich Schiller University, Jena
Hunt S, Low J, Burns KC (2008) Adaptive numerical competency in a food-hoarding songbird. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.0702
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2008.0702
Hyde DC (2011) Two systems of non-symbolic numerical cognition. Front Hum Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2011.00150
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00150
pubmed: 22144955
pmcid: 3228256
Kahneman D, Treisman A, Gibbs BJ (1992) The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information. Cogn Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90007-O
doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(92)90007-O
pubmed: 1582172
Kaminski J, Nitzschner M (2013) Do dogs get the point? A review of dog-human communication ability. Learn Motiv. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2013.05.001
doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2013.05.001
Knolle F, McBride SD, Stewart JE et al (2017) A stop-signal task for sheep: introduction and validation of a direct measure for the stop-signal reaction time. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1085-7
doi: 10.1007/s10071-017-1085-7
pubmed: 28389761
pmcid: 5486475
Krueger LE (1972) Perceived numerosity. Percept Psychophys. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212674
doi: 10.3758/BF03212674
Lampe M, Bräuer J, Kaminski J, Virányi Z (2017) The effects of domestication and ontogeny on cognition in dogs and wolves. Sci Rep. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-12055-6
doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-12055-6
pubmed: 28916808
pmcid: 5601471
Leibovich T, Ansari D (2016) The symbol-grounding problem in numerical cognition: a review of theory, evidence, and outstanding questions. Can J Exp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000070
doi: 10.1037/cep0000070
pubmed: 26913782
Leibovich T, Katzin N, Harel M, Henik A (2017) From “sense of number” to “sense of magnitude”: the role of continuous magnitudes in numerical cognition. Behav Brain Sci. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X16000960
doi: 10.1017/S0140525X16000960
pubmed: 29342648
Lemaître JF, Ramm SA, Hurst JL, Stockley P (2011) Social cues of sperm competition influence accessory reproductive gland size in a promiscuous mammal. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.1828
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.1828
Libertus ME, Starr A, Brannon EM (2014) Number trumps area for 7-month-old infants. Dev Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032986
doi: 10.1037/a0032986
pubmed: 23647413
Lucon-Xiccato T, Miletto Petrazzini ME, Agrillo C, Bisazza A (2015) Guppies discriminate between two quantities of food items but prioritize item size over total amount. Anim Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.06.019
doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.06.019
MacDonald SE, Agnes MM (1999) Orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus abelii) spatial memory and behavior in a foraging task. J Comp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.113.2.213
doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.113.2.213
MacLean EL, Hare B, Nun CL et al (2014) The evolution of self-control. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1323533111
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1323533111
pubmed: 24753565
McElreath R (2018) Statistical rethinking: a bayesian course with examples in R and stan. CRC Press, Boca Raton
doi: 10.1201/9781315372495
Meyer S, Nürnberg G, Puppe B, Langbein J (2012) The cognitive capabilities of farm animals: categorisation learning in dwarf goats (Capra hircus). Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0485-y
doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0485-y
pubmed: 22457061
Miletto Petrazzini ME, Wynne CDL (2016) What counts for dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) in a quantity discrimination task? Behav Processes. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.11.013
doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.11.013
pubmed: 26601897
Miletto Petrazzini ME, Wynne CDL (2017) Quantity discrimination in canids: dogs (Canis familiaris) and wolves (Canis lupus) compared. Behav Processes. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2017.09.003
doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2017.09.003
pubmed: 28899810
Mitchell G, Roberts DG, van Sittert SJ, Skinner JD (2013) Orbit orientation and eye morphometrics in giraffes (Giraffa camelopardalis). African Zool. https://doi.org/10.1080/15627020.2013.11407600
doi: 10.1080/15627020.2013.11407600
Nawroth C, Von Borell E, Langbein J (2014) Exclusion performance in dwarf goats (Capra aegagrus hircus) and sheep (Ovis orientalis aries). PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093534
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093534
pubmed: 24695781
pmcid: 3973590
Nawroth C, von Borell E, Langbein J (2015a) Object permanence in the dwarf goat (Capra aegagrus hircus): perseveration errors and the tracking of complex movements of hidden objects. Appl Anim Behav Sci 167:20–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.010
doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2015.03.010
Nawroth C, von Borell E, Langbein J (2015b) ‘Goats that stare at men’: dwarf goats alter their behaviour in response to human head orientation, but do not spontaneously use head direction as a cue in a food-related context. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-014-0777-5
doi: 10.1007/s10071-014-0777-5
pubmed: 25650328
Nawroth C, Baciadonna L, McElligott AG (2016) Goats learn socially from humans in a spatial problem-solving task. Anim Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.09.004
doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2016.09.004
Nieder A (2020) The adaptive value of numerical competence. Trends Ecol Evol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.02.009
doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2020.02.009
pubmed: 32521244
Osthaus B, Proops L, Hocking I, Burden F (2013) Spatial cognition and perseveration by horses, donkeys and mules in a simple A-not-B detour task. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0589-4
doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0589-4
pubmed: 23271641
Parrish AE, French KA, Guild AS et al (2020) The density bias: capuchin monkeys (Sapajus apella) prefer densely arranged items in a food-choice task. J Comp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000213
doi: 10.1037/com0000213
pubmed: 31971398
Perdue BM, Talbot CF, Stone AM, Beran MJ (2012) Putting the elephant back in the herd: elephant relative quantity judgments match those of other species. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-012-0521-y
doi: 10.1007/s10071-012-0521-y
pubmed: 22692435
pmcid: 3763236
Petrazzini MEM (2014) Trained quantity abilities in horses (Equus caballus): a preliminary investigation. Behav Sci (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/bs4030213
doi: 10.3390/bs4030213
Pitcher BJ, Briefer EF, Baciadonna L, McElligott AG (2017) Cross-modal recognition of familiar conspecifics in goats. R Soc Open Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160346
doi: 10.1098/rsos.160346
pubmed: 28386412
pmcid: 5367292
Range F, Jenikejew J, Schröder I, Virányi Z (2014) Difference in quantity discrimination in dogs and wolves. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01299
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01299
pubmed: 25642203
pmcid: 4235270
Rivas-Blanco D, Pohl I-M, Dale R et al (2020) Wolves and dogs may rely on non-numerical cues in quantity discrimination tasks when given the choice. Front Psychol 11:2412
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.573317
Sears CR, Pylyshyn ZW (2000) Multiple object tracking and attentional processing. Can J Exp Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087326
doi: 10.1037/h0087326
pubmed: 10721235
Shultz S, Dunbar RIM (2006) Both social and ecological factors predict ungulate brain size. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2005.3283
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3283
Stevens JR (2017) Replicability and reproducibility in comparative psychology. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00862
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00862
pubmed: 28603511
pmcid: 5445189
Stevens JR, Wood JN, Hauser MD (2007) When quantity trumps number: Discrimination experiments in cotton-top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus) and common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus). Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-007-0081-8
doi: 10.1007/s10071-007-0081-8
pubmed: 17354004
Uller C, Lewis J (2009) Horses (Equus caballus) select the greater of two quantities in small numerical contrasts. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-009-0225-0
doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0225-0
pubmed: 19387706
Uller C, Jaeger R, Guidry G, Martin C (2003) Salamanders (Plethodon cinereus) go for more: rudiments of number in an amphibian. Anim Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-003-0167-x
doi: 10.1007/s10071-003-0167-x
pubmed: 14685823
Uller C, Urquhart C, Lewis J, Berntsen M (2013) Ten-month-old infants’ reaching choices for “more”: the relationship between inter-stimulus distance and number. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00084
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00084
pubmed: 23471080
pmcid: 3590567
Utrata E, Virányi Z, Range F (2012) Quantity discrimination in wolves (Canis lupus). Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00505
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00505
pubmed: 23181044
pmcid: 3499916
Vonk J, Beran MJ (2012) Bears “count” too: quantity estimation and comparison in black bears, Ursus americanus. Anim Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.05.001
doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.05.001
pubmed: 22822244
pmcid: 3398692
Wadhera D, Wilkie LM, Capaldi-Phillips ED (2018) The rewarding effects of number and surface area of food in rats. Learn Behav. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-017-0305-y
doi: 10.3758/s13420-017-0305-y
pubmed: 29270881
Wolf TE, Ngonga Ngomo AC, Bennett NC et al (2018) Seasonal changes in social networks of giraffes. J Zool. https://doi.org/10.1111/jzo.12531
doi: 10.1111/jzo.12531
Zeder MA (2006) Central questions in the domestication of plants and animals. Evol Anthropol 15:105–117
doi: 10.1002/evan.20101
Zeder MA (2012) Pathways to animal domestication. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139019514.013