Abstract: Several species use the number of young produced as public information (PI) to assess breeding site quality. PI is inaccessible for synchronously breeding birds because nests are empty by the time the young can collect this information. We investigate if location cues are the next best source of inadvertent social information (ISI) used by young prospectors during breeding site choice. We experimentally deployed ISI as decoys and song playbacks of breeding males in suitable and sub-optimal habitats during pre- and post-breeding periods, and monitored territory establishment during the subsequent breeding season for a social, bobolink (Dolichonyx oryzivorus), and a more solitary species, Nelson's sharp-tailed sparrow (Ammodramus nelsoni). The sparrows did not respond to treatments, but bobolinks responded strongly to post-breeding location cues, irrespective of habitat quality. The following year, 17/20 sub-optimal plots to which bobolink males were recruited were defended for at least two weeks, indicating that song heard the previous year could exert a “carry-over attraction” effect on conspecifics the following year. Sixteen recruited males were natal dispersers, as expected when animals have little opportunity to directly sample their natal habitat quality. We suggest that differences in breeding synchronicity may induce an equivalent clinal distribution of ISI use.

Abstract: Like other corvids, food-storing ravens protect their caches from being pilfered by conspecifics by means of aggression and by re-caching. In the wild and in captivity, potential pilferers rarely approach caches until the storers have left the cache vicinity. When storers are experimentally prevented from leaving, pilferers first search at places other than the cache sites. These behaviours raise the possibility that ravens are capable of withholding intentions and providing false information to avoid provoking the storers' aggression for cache protection. Alternatively, birds may refrain from pilfering to avoid conflicts with dominants. Here we examined whether ravens adjust their pilfer tactics according to social context and type of competitors. We allowed birds that had witnessed a conspecific making caches to pilfer those caches either in private, together with the storer, or together with a conspecific bystander that had not created the caches (non-storer) but had seen them being made. Compared to in-private trials, ravens delayed approaching the caches only in the presence of storers. Furthermore, they quickly engaged in searching away from the caches when together with dominant storers but directly approached the caches when together with dominant non-storers. These findings demonstrate that ravens selectively alter their pilfer behaviour with those individuals that are likely to defend the caches (storers) and support the interpretation that they are deceptively manipulating the others' behaviour.

Abstract: For 30 years Gallup's (Science 167:86-87, 1970) mark test, which consists of confronting a mirror-experienced test animal with its own previously altered mirror image, usually a color mark on forehead, eyebrow or ear, has delivered valuable results about the distribution of visual self-recognition in non-human primates. Chimpanzees, bonobos, orangutans and, less frequently, gorillas can learn to correctly understand the reflection of their body in a mirror. However, the standard version of the mark test is good only for positively proving the existence of self-recognition. Conclusive statements about the lack of self-recognition are more difficult because of the methodological constraints of the test. This situation has led to a persistent controversy about the power of Gallup's original technique. We devised a new variant of the test which permits more unequivocal decisions about both the presence and absence of self-recognition. This new procedure was tested with marmoset monkeys (Callithrix jacchus), following extensive training with mirror-related tasks to facilitate performance in the standard mark test. The results show that a slightly altered mark test with a new marking substance (chocolate cream) can help to reliably discriminate between true negative results, indicating a real lack of ability to recognize oneself in a mirror, from false negative results that are due to methodological particularities of the standard test. Finally, an evolutionary hypothesis is put forward as to why many primates can use a mirror instrumentally – i.e. know how to use it for grasping at hidden objects – while failing in the decisive mark test.