Abstract: Barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus) utter “shrill barks” in response to disturbances in their surroundings. In some cases, the majority of group members react by running away or climbing up a tree. In many other instances, however, group members show no overt reaction to these calls. We conducted a series of playback experiments to identify the factors underlying subjects' responses. We presented calls given in response to dogs that had elicited escape responses and calls that had failed to do so. We also presented calls given in response to snakes and to the observer approaching the sleeping-trees at night. An acoustic analysis of the calls presented in the playback experiments (electronic supplementary material, audioclip S1) revealed significant differences among calls given in response to dogs, the observer approaching at night, and snakes. However, the analysis did not detect any differences between calls given in response to dogs that were related to whether or not they had elicited escape responses in the first place. Correspondingly, after playback of calls given in response to dogs, we observed no difference in subjects' responses in relation to whether or not the calls had initially elicited escape responses. Subjects showed startle or escape responses significantly more often after playbacks of calls given in response to dogs than after calls given in response to observers. Playbacks of calls given in response to snakes failed to elicit specific responses such as standing bipedally or scanning the grass. Although these findings may imply that responses depend on the external referent, they also indicate that there is no clear-cut relationship between the information available to the listeners and their subsequent responses. This insight forces us to extend current approaches to identifying the meaning of animal signals.

Abstract: The manipulative actions of mountain gorillas Gorilla g. beringei were examined in the context of foraging on hard-to-process plant foods in the field, in particular those used in tackling thistle Carduus nyassanus. A repertoire of 72 functionally distinct manipulative actions was recorded. Many of these actions were used in several variants of grip, finger(s) and movement path, both by different individuals and by the same individual at different times. The repertoire appears somewhat greater than that observed in comparable studies of monkeys, but a far more striking difference is found in the use of differentiated actions in concert. Mountain gorillas routinely and frequently deal with problems that involve: (1) bimanual role differentiation, with the two hands taking different roles but synchronized in time and space, and (2) digit role differentiation, with independent control of parts of the same hand used for separate purposes at the same time. The independent control that allows these abilities, so crucial to human manual constructional ability, is apparently general in African great apes. Role differentiation, between and within the hand, is evidently a primitive characteristic in the human arsenal of skills.

Abstract: Pigeons were trained with a conditional discrimination task in three-key operant chambers. Choosing either the left or right key was followed by food according to combinations of three preceding events: (a) a houselight illumination condition (dark or light), (b) presence or absence of green flashes on the three keys, (c) a color (amber or blue) of the center sample key. With these 2&#502&#502 event combinations, eight types of correct trials were prepared: (1) dark&#77no flash&#77amber&#77LEFT, (2) dark&#77no flash&#77blue&#77RIGHT, (3) dark&#77flash&#77amber&#77RIGHT, (4) dark&#77flash&#77blue&#77LEFT, (5) light&#77no flash&#77amber&#77RIGHT, (6) light&#77no flash&#77blue&#77LEFT, (7) light&#77flash&#77amber&#77LEFT, and (8) light&#77flash&#77blue&#77RIGHT. Seven of these eight types were used for training of a given bird, and then the remaining trial type was presented as the test. If the birds had learned the conditional structure of the events (the hierarchical switching rule), they would have responded correctly to the test type. However, they chose the opposite side key, suggesting that they had learned cue configuration or multiple rules to solve the task.

Abstract: Chimpanzees and young children understand much about what other individuals have and have not seen. This study investigates what they understand about their own visual perception. Chimpanzees, orangutans, and 2.5-year-old children were presented with a finding game in which food or stickers were hidden in one of two or three tubes. We varied whether subjects saw the baiting of the tubes, whether subjects could see through the tubes, and whether there was a delay between baiting and presentation of the tubes to subjects. We measured not only whether subjects chose the correct tube but also, more importantly, whether they spontaneously looked into one or more of the tubes before choosing one. Most apes and children appropriately looked into the tubes before choosing one more often when they had not seen the baiting than when they had seen the baiting. In general, they used efficient search strategies more often than insufficient or excessive ones. Implications of subjects' search patterns for their understanding of seeing and knowing in the self are discussed.

Abstract: Human infants perceive two rods moving in concert behind an occluder as one unitary rod. In four experiments we tested whether pigeons also perceive unity of objects. Pigeons were trained on a matching-to-sample task to discriminate between one unitary rod moving at a constant speed and two aligned rods moving together at the same speed. The latter stimulus was identical to the former except for a gap in the center. In experiment 1, we tested pigeons in probe trials in which a rectangle occluded the center of the sample rods, to see which comparison stimulus, the unitary rod or the aligned two rods, the subjects would match to the sample. Two of the three subjects pecked at the two rods significantly more often than at the unitary rod. In experiment 2, we trained the same pigeons to match the sample rods moving “in front of” the occluder. Pigeons persisted in matching two separate rods to the unitary rod moving in front of the occluder. In experiments 3 and 4, we used a parallelogram and an undulating shape as the occluder to alter the shape and the size of the portions above and below the occluder by the motion of the sample rods. Both subjects chose the two rods significantly more often than chance in experiment 3 and one of them did so in experiment 4. The results suggest that pigeons do not complete occluded portions even though the two elements move in concert. These negative results suggest that some alternative way of identifying objects may have evolved in pigeons.