Abstract: Food caching birds hide food and recover the caches when supplies are less abundant. There is, however, a risk to this strategy because the caches are susceptible to pilfering by others. Corvids use a number of different strategies to reduce possible cache theft. Scrub-jays with previous experience of pilfering other's caches cached worms in two visuospatially distinct caching trays either in private or in the presence of a conspecific. When these storers had cached in private, they subsequently observed both trays out of reach of a conspecific. When these storers had cached in the presence of a conspecific, they subsequently watched the observer pilfering from one of the trays while the other tray was placed in full view, but out of reach. The storers were then allowed to recover the remaining caches 3 h later. Jays cached more worms when they were observed during caching. At the time of recovery, they re-cached more than if they had cached in private, selectively re-caching outside of the trays in sites unbeknown to potential thieves. In addition, after a single pilfering trial, the jays switched their recovery strategy from predominantly checking their caches (i.e. returning to a cache site to see whether the food remained there) to predominantly eating them. Re-caching remained constant across the three trials. These results suggest that scrub-jays use flexible, cognitive caching and recovery strategies to aid in reducing potential future pilfering of caches by conspecifics.

Abstract: It is possible that non-specialised cues transmitted by conspecifics guide animals' food search provided they have the cognitive abilities needed to read these cues. Macaques often check the mouth of their group-mates by olfactory and/or visual inspection. We investigated whether Tonkean macaques ( Macaca tonkeana) can find the location of distant food on the basis of cues conveyed by group-mates. The subjects of the study were two 6-year-old males, who belonged to a social group of Tonkean macaques raised in semi-free-ranging conditions. In a first experiment, we tested whether the subject can choose between two sites after having sniffed a partner who has just eaten food corresponding to one of the sites. We found that both subjects were able to choose the matching site significantly above the chance level. This demonstrated that Tonkean macaques are capable of delayed olfactory matching. They could associate a food location with an odour conveyed by a partner. In a second experiment, the same subjects were allowed to see their partner through a Plexiglas window. Both subjects were still able to choose the matching site, demonstrating they could rely on visual cues alone. Passive recruitment of partners appears possible in macaques. They can improve their foraging performances by finding the location of environmental resources from olfactory or visual cues conveyed by group-mates.

Abstract: Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) know what others can and cannot see in a competitive situation. Does this reflect a general understanding the perceptions of others` In a study by Hare et al. (2000) pairs of chimpanzees competed over two pieces of food. Subordinate individuals preferred to approach food that was behind a barrier that the dominant could not see, suggesting that chimpanzees can take the visual perspective of others. We extended this paradigm to the auditory modality to investigate whether chimpanzees are sensitive to whether a competitor can hear food rewards being hidden. Results suggested that the chimpanzees did not take what the competitor had heard into account, despite being able to locate the hiding place themselves by the noise.

Abstract: Abstract  The issue whether non-human primates have other-regarding preference and/or inequity aversion has been under debate. We investigated whether tufted capuchin monkeys are sensitive to others’ reward in various experimental food sharing settings. Two monkeys faced each other. The operator monkey chose one of two food containers placed between the participants, each containing a food item for him/herself and another for the recipient. The recipient passively received either high- or low-value food depending on the operator’s choice, whereas the operator obtained the same food regardless of his/her choice. The recipients were either the highest- or lowest-ranking member of the group, and the operators were middle-ranking. In Experiment 1, the operators chose the high-value food for the subordinate recipient more frequently than when there was no recipient, whereas they were indifferent in their choice for the dominant. This differentiated behavior could have been because the dominant recipient frequently ate the low-value food. In Experiment 2, we increased the difference in the value of the two food items so that both recipients would reject the low-value food. The results were the same as in Experiment 1. In Experiment 3, we placed an opaque screen in front of the recipient to examine effects of visual contact between the participants. The operators’ food choice generally shifted toward providing the low-value food for the recipient. These results suggest that capuchins are clearly sensitive to others’ reward and that they show other-regarding preference or a form of inequity aversion depending upon the recipients and the presence of visual contact.