Abstract: The genus Thelazia (Spirurida, Thelaziidae) includes a cosmopolitan group of eyeworm spirurids responsible for ocular infections in domestic and wild animals and transmitted by different species of muscids. Bovine thelaziosis is caused by Thelazia rhodesi Desmarest 1828, Thelazia gulosa Railliet & Henry 1910, and Thelazia skrjabini Erschow 1928, which occur in many countries; T. gulosa and T. skrjabini have been reported mainly in the New World, while T. rhodesi is particularly common in the Old World. In Italy, T. rhodesi was reported in southern regions a long time ago and, recently, T. gulosa and T. skrjabini have been identified in autochthonous cattle first in Apulia and then in Sardinia. Thirteen species of Musca are listed as intermediate hosts of eyeworms, but only Musca autumnalis and Musca larvipara have been demonstrated to act as vectors of Thelazia in the ex-URSS, North America, ex-Czechoslovakia and more recently in Sweden. In Italy, after the reports of T. gulosa and T. skrjabini in southern regions, the intermediate hosts of bovine eyeworms were initially only suspected as the predominant secretophagous Muscidae collected from the periocular region of cattle with thelaziosis were the face flies, M. autumnalis and M. larvipara, followed by Musca osiris, Musca tempestiva and Musca domestica. The well-known constraints in the identification of immature eyeworms to species by fly dissection and also the time-consuming techniques used constitute important obstacles to epidemiological field studies (i.e. vector identification and/or role, prevalence and pattern of infection in flies, etc.). Molecular studies have recently permitted to further investigations into this area. A PCR-RFLP analysis of the ribosomal ITS-1 sequence was developed to differentiate the 3 species of Thelazia (i.e. T. gulosa, T. rhodesi and T. skrjabini) found in Italy, then a molecular epidemiological survey has recently been carried out in field conditions throughout five seasons of fly activity and has identified the role of M. autumnalis, M. larvipara, M. osiris and M. domestica as vectors of T. gulosa and of M. autumnalis and M. larvipara of T. rhodesi. Moreover, M. osiris was described, for the first time, to act as a vector of T. gulosa and M. larvipara of T. gulosa and T. rhodesi. The mean prevalence in the fly population examined was found to be 2.86%. The molecular techniques have opened new perspectives for further research on the ecology and epidemiology not only of Thelazia in cattle but also of other autochthonous species of Thelazia which have been also recorded in Italy, such as Thelazia callipaeda, which is responsible for human and canid ocular infection and Thelazia lacrymalis, the horse eyeworm whose epidemiological molecular studies are in progress.

Abstract: Planning is an important component of cognition that contributes, for example, to efficient movement through space. In the current study we presented novel two-dimensional alley mazes to four chimpanzees and three capuchin monkeys to identify the nature and efficiency of planning in relation to varying task parameters. All the subjects solved more mazes without error than expected by chance, providing compelling evidence that both species planned their choices in some manner. The probability of making a correct choice on mazes designed to be more demanding and presented later in the testing series was higher than on earlier, simpler mazes (chimpanzees), or unchanged (capuchin monkeys), suggesting microdevelopment of strategic choice. Structural properties of the mazes affected both species' choices. Capuchin monkeys were less likely than chimpanzees to take a correct path that initially led away from the goal but that eventually led to the goal. Chimpanzees were more likely to make an error by passing a correct path than by turning onto a wrong path. Chimpanzees and one capuchin made more errors on choices farther in sequence from the goal. Each species corrected errors before running into the end of an alley in approximately 40% of cases. Together, these findings suggest nascent planning abilities in each species, and the prospect for significant development of strategic planning capabilities on tasks presenting multiple simultaneous or sequential spatial relations. The computerized maze paradigm appears well suited to investigate movement planning and spatial perception in human and nonhuman primates alike.

Abstract: The evolution of cooperation has long been a topic near and dear to the hearts of behavioral and evolutionary ecologists. Cooperative behaviors run the gamut from fairly simple to very complicated and there are a myriad of ways to study cooperation. Here I shall focus on three paths that have been delineated in the study of intraspecific cooperation among unrelated individuals: reciprocity, byproduct mutualism, and group selection. In each case, I attempt to delineate the theory underlying each of these paths and then provide examples from the empirical literature. In addition, I shall briefly touch upon some recent work that has attempted to examine (or re-examine) the role of cognition and phylogeny in the study of cooperative behavior. While empirical and theoretical work has made significant strides in the name of better understanding the evolution and maintenance of cooperative behavior in animals, much work remains for the future. “From the point of view of the moralist, the animal world is on about the same level as the gladiator's show. The creatures are fairly well treated, and set to fight; whereby the strongest, the swiftest and the cunningest live to fight another day. The spectator has no need to turn his thumb down, as no quarter is given em leader the weakest and the stupidest went to the wall, while the toughest and the shrewdest, those who were best fitted to cope with their circumstances, but not the best in any other way, survived. Life was a continuous free fight, and em leader a war of each against all was the normal state of existence.” (Huxley 1888)

Abstract: There is currently much debate about the nature of social learning in chimpanzees. The main question is whether they can copy others' actions, as opposed to reproducing the environmental effects of these actions using their own preexisting behavioral strategies. In the current study, chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and human children (Homo sapiens) were shown different demonstrations of how to open a tube-in both cases by a conspecific. In different experimental conditions, demonstrations consisted of (1) action only (the actions necessary to open the tube without actually opening it); (2) end state only (the open tube, without showing any actions); (3) both of these components (in a full demonstration); or (4) neither of these components (in a baseline condition). In the first three conditions subjects saw one of two different ways that the tube could open (break in middle; caps off ends). Subjects' behavior in each condition was assessed for how often they opened the tube, how often they opened it in the same location as the demonstrator, and how often they copied the demonstrator's actions or style of opening the tube. Whereas chimpanzees reproduced mainly the environmental results of the demonstrations (emulation), human children often reproduced the demonstrator's actions (imitation). Because the procedure used was similar in many ways to the procedure that Meltzoff (Dev Psych 31:1, 1995) used to study the understanding of others' unfulfilled intentions, the implications of these findings with regard to chimpanzees' understanding of others' intentions are also discussed.