Abstract: Twelve pigeons ( Columba livia) were trained on a go/no-go schedule to discriminate between two kinds of movement patterns of dots, which to human observers appear to be “intentional” and “non-intentional” movements. In experiment 1, the intentional motion stimulus contained one dot (a “wolf”) that moved systematically towards another dot as though stalking it, and three distractors (“sheep”). The non-intentional motion stimulus consisted of four distractors but no stalker. Birds showed some improvement of discrimination as the sessions progressed, but high levels of discrimination were not reached. In experiment 2, the same birds were tested with different stimuli. The same parameters were used but the number of intentionally moving dots in the intentional motion stimulus was altered, so that three wolves stalked one sheep. Despite the enhanced difference of movement patterns, the birds did not show any further improvement in discrimination. However, birds for which the non-intentional stimulus was associated with reward showed a decline in discrimination. These results indicated that pigeons can discriminate between stimuli that do and do not contain an element that human observer see as moving intentionally. However, as no feature-positive effect was found in experiment 1, it is assumed that pigeons did not perceive or discriminate these stimuli on the basis that the intentional stimuli contained a feature that the non-intentional stimuli lacked, though the convergence seen in experiment 2 may have been an effective feature for the pigeons. Pigeons seem to be able to recognise some form of multiple simultaneously goal-directed motions, compared to random motions, as a distinctive feature, but do not seem to use simple “intentional” motion paths of two geometrical figures, embedded in random motions, as a feature whose presence or absence differentiates motion displays.

Abstract: Three avian species, a seed-caching corvid (Clark's nutcrackers; Nucifraga columbiana), a non-seed-caching corvid (jackdaws; Corvus monedula), and a non-seed-caching columbid (pigeons; Columba livia), were tested for ability to learn to find a goal halfway between 2 landmarks when distance between the landmarks varied during training. All 3 species learned, but jackdaws took much longer than either pigeons or nutcrackers. The nutcrackers searched more accurately than either pigeons or jackdaws. Both nutcrackers and pigeons showed good transfer to novel landmark arrays in which interlandmark distances were novel, but inconclusive results were obtained from jackdaws. Species differences in this spatial task appear quantitative rather than qualitative and are associated with differences in natural history rather than phylogeny.

Abstract: Individual recognition has been attributed a crucial role in the evolution of complex social systems such as helping behaviour and cooperation. A classical example for interspecific cooperation is the mutualism between the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus and its client reef fish species. For stable cooperation to evolve, it is generally assumed that partners interact repeatedly and remember each other's past behaviour. Repeated interactions may be achieved by site fidelity or individual recognition. However, as some cleaner fish have more than 2,300 interactions per day with various individuals per species and various species of clients, basic assumptions of cooperation theory might be violated in this mutualism. We tested the cleaner L. dimidiatus and its herbivorous client, the surgeon fish Ctenochaetus striatus, for their ability to distinguish between a familiar and an unfamiliar partner in a choice experiment. Under natural conditions, cleaners and clients have to build up their relationship, which is probably costly for both. We therefore predicted that both clients and cleaners should prefer the familiar partner in our choice experiment. We found that cleaners spent significantly more time near the familiar than the unfamiliar clients in the first 2 minutes of the experiment. This indicates the ability for individual recognition in cleaners. In contrast, the client C. striatus showed no significant preference. This could be due to a sampling artefact, possibly due to a lack of sufficient motivation. Alternatively, clients may not need to recognise their cleaners but instead remember the defined territories of L. dimidiatus to achieve repeated interactions with the same individual.

Abstract: The landmark discrimination learning test can be used to assess the ability to utilize allocentric spatial information to locate targets. The present experiments examined the role of various factors on performance of a landmark discrimination learning task in beagle dogs. Experiments 1 and 2 looked at the effects of age and food composition. Experiments 3 and 4 were aimed at characterizing the cognitive strategies used in performance on this task and in long-term retention. Cognitively equivalent groups of old and young dogs were placed into either a test group maintained on food enriched with a broad-spectrum of antioxidants and mitochondrial cofactors, or a control group maintained on a complete and balanced food formulated for adult dogs. Following a wash-in period, the dogs were tested on a series of problems, in which reward was obtained when the animal responded selectively to the object closest to a thin wooden block, which served as a landmark. In Experiment 1, dogs were first trained to respond to a landmark placed directly on top of coaster, landmark 0 (L0). In the next phase of testing, the landmark was moved at successively greater distances (1, 4 or 10 cm) away from the reward object. Learning varied as a function of age group, food group, and task. The young dogs learned all of the tasks more quickly than the old dogs. The aged dogs on the enriched food learned L0 significantly more rapidly than aged dogs on control food. A higher proportion of dogs on the enriched food learned the task, when the distance was increased to 1cm. Experiment 2 showed that accuracy decreased with increased distance between the reward object and landmark, and this effect was greater in old animals. Experiment 3 showed stability of performance, despite using a novel landmark, and new locations, indicating that dogs learned the landmark concept. Experiment 4 found age impaired long-term retention of the landmark task. These results indicate that allocentric spatial learning is impaired in an age-dependent manner in dogs, and that age also affects performance when the distance between the landmark and target is increased. In addition, these results both support a role of oxidative damage in the development of age-associated cognitive dysfunction and indicate that short-term administration of a food enriched with supplemental antioxidants and mitochondrial cofactors can partially reverse the deleterious effects of aging on cognition.