Abstract: Abstract  Recent research has shown that domestic dogs are particularly good at determining the focus of human attention, often outperforming chimpanzees and hand-reared wolves. It has been suggested that the close evolutionary relationship between humans and dogs has led to the development of this ability; however, very few other domestic species have been studied. We tested the ability of 36 domestic horses to discriminate between an attentive and inattentive person in determining whom to approach for food. The cues provided were body orientation, head orientation or whether the experimenters’ eyes were open or closed. A fourth, mixed condition was included where the attentive person stood with their body facing away from the subjects but their head turned towards the subject while the inattentive person stood with their body facing the subject but their head turned away. Horses chose the attentive person significantly more often using the body cue, head cue, and eye cue but not the mixed cue. This result suggests that domestic horses are highly sensitive to human attentional cues, including gaze. The possible role of evolutionary and environmental factors in the development of this ability is discussed.

Abstract: ABSTRACT Reciprocity is probably the most debated of the evolutionary explanations for cooperation. Part of the confusion surrounding this debate stems from a failure to note that two different processes can result in reciprocity: partner control and partner choice. We suggest that the common observation that group-living animals direct their cooperative behaviours preferentially to those individuals from which they receive most cooperation is to be interpreted as the result of the sum of the two separate processes of partner control and partner choice. We review evidence that partner choice is the prevalent process in primates and propose explanations for this pattern. We make predictions that highlight the need for studies that separate the effects of partner control and partner choice in a broader variety of group-living taxa.

Abstract: Social referencing is the seeking of information from another individual and the use of that information to evaluate a situation. It is a well-documented ability in human infants but has not been studied experimentally in nonhuman primates. Seventeen young nursery-reared chimpanzees (14 to 41 months old) were observed in a standard social referencing paradigm in which they received happy and fear messages concerning novel objects from a familiar human caregiver. Each chimpanzee looked referentially at their caregiver, and the emotional messages that they received differentially influenced their gaze behavior and avoidance of the novel objects. It is concluded that chimpanzees can acquire information about their complex social and physical environments through social referencing and can use emotional information to alter their own behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

Abstract: Despite numerous attempts to define animal tool use over the past four decades, the definition remains elusive and the behaviour classification somewhat subjective. Here, we provide a brief review of the definitions of animal tool use and show how those definitions have been modified over time. While some aspects have remained constant (i.e., the distinction between 'true' and 'borderline' tool use), others have been added (i.e., the distinction between 'dynamic' and 'static' behaviours). We present an updated, comprehensive catalog of documented animal tool use that indicates whether the behaviours observed included any 'true' tool use, whether the observations were limited to captive animals, whether tool manufacture has been observed, and whether the observed tool use was limited to only one individual and, thus, 'anecdotal' (i.e., N = 1). Such a catalog has not been attempted since Beck (1980). In addition to being a useful reference for behaviourists, this catalog demonstrates broad tool use and manufacture trends that may be of interest to phylogenists, evolutionary ecologists, and cognitive evolutionists. Tool use and tool manufacture are shown to be widespread across three phyla and seven classes of the animal kingdom. Moreover, there is complete overlap between the Aves and Mammalia orders in terms of the tool use categories (e.g., food extraction, food capture, agonism) arguing against any special abilities of mammals. The majority of tool users, almost 85% of the entries, use tools in only one of the tool use categories. Only members of the Passeriformes and Primates orders have been observed to use tools in four or more of the ten categories. Thus, observed tool use by some members of these two orders (e.g., Corvus, Papio) is qualitatively different from that of all other animal taxa. Finally, although there are similarities between Aves and Mammalia, and Primates and Passeriformes, primate tool use is qualitatively different. Approximately 35% of the entries for this order demonstrate a breadth of tool use (i.e., three or more categories by any one species) compared to other mammals (0%), Aves (2.4%), and the Passeriformes (3.1%). This greater breadth in tool use by some organisms may involve phylogenetic or cognitive differences � or may simply reflect differences in length and intensity of observations. The impact that tool usage may have had on groups' respective ecological niches and, through niche-construction, on their respective evolutionary trajectories remains a subject for future study.

Abstract: How animals use space has important consequences for feeding ecology, social organization, mating strategies and conservation management. In white rhinoceros, female home ranges are much larger than male territories, suggesting that movement patterns are influenced by factors other than resource distribution. In this study we placed radiotransmitters on 15 female white rhinoceros, recording 1758 locations and collecting behavioural data during 1671 observation sessions, making this the largest data set of its kind in this species. We investigated how habitat variables and male territories influenced female movement and reproductive behaviour. Female home ranges were approximately 20 km2 and core areas were 5 km2, with male territories roughly the same size as female core areas. Female range size did not vary with season, but the pattern of space use did vary. Females used grassland habitat preferentially, utilizing these areas significantly more than expected based on availability. Findings relevant to the mating strategy include: (1) the amount of grassland in a male's territory predicted female use of the territory; (2) the time that a female spent in a male's territory was a significant predictor of reproductive activity with the male, indicating that females probably mate with the most familiar male; and (3) the temporal pattern of female space use suggests that females did not increase mate sampling behaviour nor did they become more choosy about which males they visited when reproductively active. These findings suggest that males may maximize reproductive success by defending areas containing more grassland habitat.