Abstract: Innovative problem solving enables individuals to deal with novel social and ecological challenges. However, our understanding of the importance of innovation for animals in their natural habitat is limited because experimental investigations of innovation have historically focused on captive animals. To determine how captivity affects innovation, and whether captive studies of animal innovation suffer from low external validity, we need experimental investigations of innovation in both wild and captive populations of the same species in diverse taxa. Here we inquired whether wild and captive spotted hyaenas differ in their ability to solve the same novel technical problem, and in the diversity of exploratory behaviours they exhibit when first interacting with the problem. Our results suggest that wild and captive populations show important differences in their innovative problem-solving abilities. Captive hyaenas were significantly more successful at solving the novel problem, and significantly more diverse in their initial exploratory behaviour, than were wild hyaenas. We were able to rule out hypotheses suggesting that these differences result from excess energy or time available to captive animals. We conclude that captive hyaenas were more successful because captive individuals were less neophobic and more exploratory than their wild counterparts. These results have important implications for our interpretation of studies on innovative problem solving in captive animals and aid our attempts to gain a broader understanding of the importance of innovation for animals in their natural habitat.

Abstract: In modern intensive husbandry systems there is an increasing tendency for animals to interact with technical equipment. If the animal-technology interface is well-designed this may improve animal welfare by offering challenges for cognitive adaptation. Here a system and its application is presented that acoustically calls individual pigs out of a group (n = 8) to a feeding station. In three different learning phases, the computer-controlled “call-feeding-station” (CFS) trained the animals to recognize a specific acoustic signal as a summons for food, using a combination of classical and operant conditioning techniques. The experimental group's stall contained four CFSs, at each of which one animal at a time was able to feed. When an animal had learned to discriminate and recognize its individual acoustic signal it had to localize the particular CFS that was calling and to enter inside it. Then, it received a portion of feed, the amount of which was adapted to the respective age of the animals. Each animal was called at several, unpredictable times each day and the computer programme ensured that the total feed supply was sufficient for each animal. In the last phase of the experiment the animals, in addition, had to press a button with an increasing fixed ratio for the delivery of feed. It was demonstrated that the pigs were able to adapt quickly to the CFSs. Although they were challenged over 12 h daily by requirements of attention, sensory localization and motor efforts to gain comparatively low amounts of feed, they performed well and reached fairly constant success rates between 90 and 95% and short delays between 14 and 16 s between a summons and the food release in the last phase of the experiment. The weight gain during the experiment was the same as in a conventionally fed control group (n = 8). We therefore conclude that CFSs present a positive challenge to the animals with no negative effects on performance but with a potentially beneficial role for welfare and against boredom. The system is also a suitable experimental platform for research on the effects of successful adaptation by rewarded cognitive processes in pigs.

Abstract: ? is the article no longer available?

Abstract: The ability to innovate and the social transmission of innovations have played a central role in human evolution. However, innovation is also crucial for other animals, by allowing them to cope with novel socioecological challenges. Although innovation plays such a central role in animals' lives, we still do not know the conditions required for innovative behaviour to emerge. Here, we focused on interindividual differences in innovation by (1) extensively reviewing existing literature on innovative behaviour in animals and (2) quantitatively testing the different evolutionary hypotheses that have been proposed to explain interindividual variation in innovation propensity during foraging tasks. We ran a series of phylogenetically controlled mixed-effects meta-regression models to determine which hypotheses (if any) are supported by currently available empirical studies. Our analyses show that innovation is more common in individuals that are older and belong to the larger sex, but also in more neophilic and/or explorative individuals. Moreover, these effects change depending on the study setting (i.e. wild versus captive). Our results provide no clear support to the excess of energy or the bad competitor hypotheses and suggest that study setting and interindividual differences in traits related to personality are also important predictors of innovation.

Abstract: Dominance hierarchies are widely described in nature. Commonly, an individual's ordinal rank is used as a measure of its position in the hierarchy, and, therefore its priority of access to resources. This use of ordinal ranks has several related drawbacks: (1) it is difficult to assess the magnitude or the significance of the difference in degree of dominance between two individuals; (2) it is difficult to evaluate the significance of differences between dominance matrices based on different behaviours or on the same behaviour at different times, and (3) it is difficult to use parametric statistical techniques to relate dominance rank to other quantities of interest. In this paper we describe a method for assigning cardinal dominance indices that does not suffer from these drawbacks. This technique is based on the Bradley-Terry model from the method of paired comparisons. We show how this model can be reinterpreted in terms of dominance interactions. and we describe a simple iterative technique for computing cardinal ranks. We then describe how to evaluate (1) whether the rank differences between individuals are significant, and (2) whether differences in the cardinal hierarchies based on different behaviours or the same behaviour at different times are significant. We then show how to generalize the method to deal with behaviours that sometimes have ambiguous outcomes, or behaviours for which the rank difference between a pair of individuals affects the rate of interaction between them.