|
|
Griffin, A. S., Tebbich, S., & Bugnyar, T. (2017). Animal cognition in a human-dominated world. Anim. Cogn., 20(1), 1–6.
Abstract: In the USA, each year, up to one billion birds are estimated to die from colliding with windowpanes (Sabo et al. 2016). A further 573,000 are struck down by wind turbines, along with 888,000 bats (Smallwood 2013). Worldwide, unintended capture in fishing devices is recognized as the single most serious global threat to migratory, long-lived marine taxa including turtles, birds, mammals and sharks (Wallace et al. 2013). Estimates put the number of amphibians killed per year on Australian roads at 5 million (Seiler 2003). The likelihood of a green turtle erroneously ingesting plastic debris, often by mistaking them for food, rose from 30% in 1985 to almost 50% in 2012 (Schuyler et al. 2013). Human-induced rapid environmental change (HIREC, sensu Sih et al. 2011) is filling animals’ environments with new threats which bear little or excessive similarity to those they have encountered in their evolutionary history (Dwernychuk and Boag 1972; Patten and Kelley 2010; Witherington 1997). As a consequence, many of the stimuli involved fall outside the adaptive processing space of animals’ evolutionary perceptual, learning, memory and decision-making systems, making individuals particularly vulnerable to their impact.
|
|
|
|
Range, F., Horn, L., Bugnyar, T., Gajdon, G., & Huber, L. (2009). Social attention in keas, dogs, and human children. Anim. Cogn., 12(1), 181–192.
Abstract: Abstract: Understanding animals" abilities to cooperate with and learn from each other has been an active field of research in recent years. One important basis for all types of social interactions is the disposition of animals to pay attention to each other-a factor often neglected in discussions and experiments. Since attention differs between species as well as between individuals, it is likely to influence the amount and type of information different species and/or observers may extract from conspecifics in any given situation. Here, we carried out a standardized comparative study on attention towards a model demonstrating food-related behavior in keas, dogs and children. In a series of experimental sessions, individuals watched different conspecific models while searching, manipulating and feeding. Visual access to the demonstration was provided by two observation holes, which allowed us to determine exactly how often and for how long observers watched the model. We found profound differences in the factors that influence attention within as well as between the tested species. This study suggests that attention should be incorporated as an important variable when testing species in social situations.
|
|
|
|
Bugnyar, T., & Heinrich, B. (2006). Pilfering ravens, Corvus corax, adjust their behaviour to social context and identity of competitors. Anim. Cogn., 9(4), 369–376.
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.
|
|
|
|
Bugnyar, T., & Kotrschal, K. (2004). Leading a conspecific away from food in ravens ( Corvus corax)? Anim. Cogn., 7(2), 69–76.
Abstract: Active misleading of conspecifics has been described as a social strategy mainly for primates. Here we report a raven leading a competitor away from food in a social foraging task. Four individuals had to search and compete for hidden food at color-marked clusters of artificial food caches. At the beginning of the experiment, a subordinate male found and exploited the majority of the food. As a result, the dominant male displaced him from the already opened boxes. The subordinate male then developed a pattern, when the loss of reward to the dominant got high, of moving to unrewarded clusters and opening boxes there. This diversion often led the dominant to approach those unrewarded clusters and the subordinate then had a head start for exploiting the rewarded boxes. Subsequently, however, the dominant male learned not to follow the subordinate to unrewarded clusters and eventually started searching for the reward himself. These interactions between the two males illustrate the ravens' potential for deceptively manipulating conspecifics. We discuss under which circumstances ravens might use this capacity.
|
|
|
|
Fraser, O. N., & Bugnyar, T. (2010). Do Ravens Show Consolation? Responses to Distressed Others. PLoS ONE, 5(5), e10605.
Abstract: <sec> <title>Background</title> <p>Bystander affiliation (post-conflict affiliation from an uninvolved bystander to the conflict victim) may represent an expression of empathy in which the bystander consoles the victim to alleviate the victim's distress (“consolation”). However, alternative hypotheses for the function of bystander affiliation also exist. Determining whether ravens spontaneously offer consolation to distressed partners may not only help us to understand how animals deal with the costs of aggressive conflict, but may also play an important role in the empathy debate.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Methodology/Principal findings</title> <p>This study investigates the post-conflict behavior of ravens, applying the predictive framework for the function of bystander affiliation for the first time in a non-ape species. We found weak evidence for reconciliation (post-conflict affiliation between former opponents), but strong evidence for both bystander affiliation and solicited bystander affiliation (post-conflict affiliation from the victim to a bystander). Bystanders involved in both interactions were likely to share a valuable relationship with the victim. Bystander affiliation offered to the victim was more likely to occur after intense conflicts. Renewed aggression was less likely to occur after the victim solicited affiliation from a bystander.</p> </sec><sec> <title>Conclusions/Significance</title> <p>Our findings suggest that in ravens, bystanders may console victims with whom they share a valuable relationship, thus alleviating the victims' post-conflict distress. Conversely victims may affiliate with bystanders after a conflict in order to reduce the likelihood of renewed aggression. These results stress the importance of relationship quality in determining the occurrence and function of post-conflict interactions, and show that ravens may be sensitive to the emotions of others.</p> </sec>
|
|
|
|
Bugnyar, T., & Kotrschal, K. (2001). Movement coordination and signalling in ravens (Corvus corax): an experimental field study. Acta. Ethol., 3(2), 101–109.
Abstract: Vagrant non-breeding ravens frequently attract conspecifics to rich ephemeral food sources. There, grouping may allow them to overcome the defence of territorial breeders. Here, we focus on ravens making use of regular food supplies in a game park, where they divert food from the provision of park animals. We investigated if ravens foraging in the Cumberland game park (Grünau, Austria) are attentive towards one another when they experience some unpredictability in food provisioning. We confronted a group of 30-50 ravens with two different treatments. Ten minutes ahead of the feeding of either wolves or wild boars we showed buckets containing pieces of meat to the ravens flying overhead. In the reliable cue treatment (RCT), the meat was placed next to one of the two enclosures, whereas in the unreliable cue treatment (UCT), the buckets were placed simultaneously in front of both enclosures though only in one of the enclosures were the animals fed 10 min later. Thus, during RCT but not during UCT, ravens could predict where food would become available. Only during UCT, ravens moved in large groups between the two feeding sites. Many ravens moving at the same time in the same direction may indicate some co-ordination in space and time, which is most likely achieved by social attraction among individuals. Furthermore, the number of ravens approaching and leaving, respectively, a feeding site cross-correlated with a temporary increase in the rate of a food-associated call, the yell. This suggests that in addition to watching each other, calling may have contributed to group formation. Possible benefits of group formation during food inspection are discussed.
|
|
