Abstract: Stereokinetic illusions have never been investigated in non-human primates, nor in other mammalian species. These illusions consist in the perception of a 3D solid object when certain 2D stimuli are rotated slowly in the plane perpendicular to the line of sight. The ability to perceive the stereokinetic illusion was investigated in the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus). Four adult marmosets were trained to discriminate between a solid cylinder and a solid cone for food reward. Once learning criterion was reached, the marmosets were tested in sets of eight probe trials in which the two solid objects used at training were replaced by two rotating 2D stimuli. Only one of these stimuli produced, at least to the human observer, the stereokinetic illusion corresponding to the solid object previously reinforced. At test, the general behaviour and the total time spent by the marmosets observing each stimulus were recorded. The subjects stayed longer near the stimulus producing the stereokinetic illusion corresponding to the solid object reinforced at training than they did near the illusion corresponding to the previously non-rewarded stimulus. Hence, the common marmosets behaved as if they could perceive stereokinetic illusions.

Abstract: Summary Reasons for performing study: Previous studies have suggested that temporomandibular joint (TMJ) kinematics depend on the type of food being masticated, but accurate measurements of TMJ motion in horses chewing different feeds have not been published. Hypothesis: The temporomandibular joint has a larger range of motion when horses chew hay compared to pellets. Methods: An optical motion capture system was used to track skin markers on the skull and mandible of 7 horses as they chewed hay and pellets. A virtual marker was created on the midline between the mandibles at the level of the 4th premolar teeth to represent the overall motion of the mandible relative to the skull during the chewing cycle. Results: Frequency of the chewing cycles was lower for hay than for pellets. Excursions of the virtual mandibular marker were significantly larger in all 3 directions when chewing hay compared to pellets. The mean velocity of the virtual mandibular marker during the chewing cycle was the same when chewing the 2 feeds. Conclusions: The range of mediolateral displacement of the mandible was sufficient to give full occlusal contact of the upper and lower dental arcades when chewing hay but not when chewing pellets. Potential relevance: These findings support the suggestion that horses receiving a diet high in concentrate feeds may require more frequent dental prophylactic examinations and treatments to avoid the development of dental irregularities associated with smaller mandibular excursions during chewing.

Abstract: The “social intelligence hypothesis” was originally conceived to explain how primates may have evolved their superior intellect and large brains when compared with other animals. Although some birds such as corvids may be intellectually comparable to apes, the same relationship between sociality and brain size seen in primates has not been found for birds, possibly suggesting a role for other non-social factors. But bird sociality is different from primate sociality. Most monkeys and apes form stable groups, whereas most birds are monogamous, and only form large flocks outside of the breeding season. Some birds form lifelong pair bonds and these species tend to have the largest brains relative to body size. Some of these species are known for their intellectual abilities (e.g. corvids and parrots), while others are not (e.g. geese and albatrosses). Although socio-ecological factors may explain some of the differences in brain size and intelligence between corvids/parrots and geese/albatrosses, we predict that the type and quality of the bonded relationship is also critical. Indeed, we present empirical evidence that rook and jackdaw partnerships resemble primate and dolphin alliances. Although social interactions within a pair may seem simple on the surface, we argue that cognition may play an important role in the maintenance of long-term relationships, something we name as “relationship intelligence”.

Abstract: The authors examine dominance and subordination in the social psychology, political science, and biology literatures. Using Summers and Winberg (2006) as a guide, the authors suggest that extreme dominance or subordination phenotypes--including social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism--are determined by an organism's genetic predispositions, motivations, stress responses, and long-term hormone release and uptake states. The authors offer hypotheses about the likely neurochemical profiles for each of these extreme dominance and subordination phenotypes and suggest two designs that begin to test these hypotheses.

Abstract: The claim that differences in brain size across primate species has mainly been driven by the demands of sociality (the “social brain” hypothesis) is now widely accepted. Some of the evidence to support this comes from the fact that species that live in large social groups have larger brains, and in particular larger neocortices. Lindenfors and colleagues (BMC Biology 5:20) add significantly to our appreciation of this process by showing that there are striking differences between the two sexes in the social mechanisms and brain units involved. Female sociality (which is more affiliative) is related most closely to neocortex volume, but male sociality (which is more competitive and combative) is more closely related to subcortical units (notably those associated with emotional responses). Thus different brain units have responded to different selection pressures.