Abstract: We conducted three experiments on social problem solving by chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes. In each experiment a subordinate and a dominant individual competed for food, which was placed in various ways on the subordinate's side of two opaque barriers. In some conditions dominants had not seen the food hidden, or food they had seen hidden was moved elsewhere when they were not watching (whereas in control conditions they saw the food being hidden or moved). At the same time, subordinates always saw the entire baiting procedure and could monitor the visual access of their dominant competitor as well. If subordinates were sensitive to what dominants did or did not see during baiting, they should have preferentially approached and retrieved the food that dominants had not seen hidden or moved. This is what they did in experiment 1 when dominants were either uninformed or misinformed about the food's location. In experiment 2 subordinates recognized, and adjusted their behaviour accordingly, when the dominant individual who witnessed the hiding was replaced with another dominant individual who had not witnessed it, thus demonstrating their ability to keep track of precisely who has witnessed what. In experiment 3 subordinates did not choose consistently between two pieces of hidden food, one of which dominants had seen hidden and one of which they had not seen hidden. However, their failure in this experiment was likely to be due to the changed nature of the competition under these circumstances and not to a failure of social-cognitive skills. These findings suggest that at least in some situations (i.e. competition with conspecifics) chimpanzees know what conspecifics have and have not seen (do and do not know), and that they use this information to devise effective social-cognitive strategies. Copyright 2001 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Abstract: Foragers can often show a broad range of strategies when searching for resources. The simplest foraging strategy is to search randomly within a habitat; however, foragers can often assess habitat quality over various spatial scales and use this information to keep themselves in, or direct themselves to, regions of high resource abundance or low predation risk. We investigated models that describe a population of consumers competing for a renewable resource that is distributed among discrete patches. Our aim was to identify what foraging strategy or strategies are expected to persist within a population, where strategies differ in the degree of habitat assessment (i.e. none, local, or global). We were interested in how the optimal strategies are dependent on the cost of assessment and habitat structure (i.e. the variation in renewal rates and predation risks among patches). The models showed that the simple random foraging strategy (i.e. make no habitat assessments) often persisted even when the cost of habitat assessment was low. Persistence could occur when habitat assessment and population dynamics generated an ideal free distribution because it could be exploited by the random foragers. Habitat assessment was more advantageous when consumers could not achieve ideal free distributions, which was more likely as patches became less productive. When productivity was low we sometimes observed the situation where different foraging strategies generated resource heterogeneities that promoted their coexistence, and this could occur even when all patches were intrinsically identical.

Abstract: The requirement for assessing the effects of stressor combinations in improving the welfare of animals has not been widely recognised. Knowledge of the effects of concurrent stressors is needed to improve environments such as transport, where animals are presented with many simultaneous challenges. However, no method for measuring the effects of different stressors with a common unit is currently available. A locomotor passive avoidance method was developed as a common currency measure of the aversion of domestic fowl to concurrent stressors, using vibrational and thermal stressors as an exemplar. Juvenile fowl, fasted overnight, were trained to run a raceway into a goal-box for small food rewards (FR1). When running consistently, the reinforcement schedule was superimposed with a FR5 treatment schedule (60 min confinement in the goal-box with either a control of no other stressors [N] or concurrent vibration and thermal stressors [VT]). Subsequent latency to return to the goal-box was recorded as a measure of aversion. The factors affecting bird response were addressed in a series of experiments to optimise the method and clarify interpretation of results. Pre-feeding (20% ration 2 h prior to testing) did not affect response, but increasing the number of treatment presentations facilitated learning and increased method sensitivity. Treatment responses were consistent across experiments; overall VT was avoided (P<0.001), but N was not. However, there was large individual variation in response to VT. A final experiment indicated that, given a visual discriminatory cue, birds were capable of learning the required association between entering the goal-box and receiving the treatment, suggesting that the delay responses were due to aversion rather than the immediate impact of treatment on ability to respond. Further work is required to test the singular stressors, but the method retains common currency potential for assessing aversion to multiple stressors.