Darwin's finches are a classic example of adaptive radiation. The ecological diversity of the Galápa-gos in part explains that radiation, but the fact that other founder species did not radiate suggests that other factors are also important. One hypothesis attempting to identify the extra factor is the flexible stem hypothesis, connecting individual adaptability to species richness. According to this hypothesis, the ancestral finches were flexible and therefore able to adapt to the new and harsh environment they encountered by exploiting new food types and developing new foraging techniques. Phenotypic variation was initially mediated by learning, but genetic accommodation entrenched differences and supplemented them with morphological adaptations. This process subsequently led to diversification and speciation of the Darwin's finches. Their current behaviour is consistent with this hypothesis as these birds use unusual resources by extraordinary means. In this paper, we identify cognitive capacities on which flexibility and innovation depend. The flexible stem hypothesis predicts that we will find high levels of these capacities in all species of Darwin's finches (not just those using innovative techniques). Here, we test that prediction, and find that while most of our data are in line with the flexible stem hypothesis, some are in tension with it.

The use and manufacture of tools have been considered to be cognitively demanding and thus a possible driving factor in the evolution of intelligence. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that enhanced physical cognitive abilities evolved in conjunction with the use of tools, by comparing the performance of naturally tool-using and non-tool-using species in a suite of physical and general learning tasks. We predicted that the habitually tool-using species, New Caledonian crows and Galápagos woodpecker finches, should outperform their non-tool-using relatives, the small tree finches and the carrion crows in a physical problem but not in general learning tasks. We only found a divergence in the predicted direction for corvids. That only one of our comparisons supports the predictions under this hypothesis might be attributable to different complexities of tool-use in the two tool-using species. A critical evaluation is offered of the conceptual and methodological problems inherent in comparative studies on tool-related cognitive abilities.

No abstract

Behavioural flexibility is thought to be a major factor in evolution. It may facilitate the discovery and exploitation of new resources, which in turn may expose populations to novel selective forces and facilitate adaptive radiation. Darwin's finches are a textbook example of adaptive radiation. They are fast learners and show a range of unusual foraging techniques, probably as a result of their flexibility. In this study we aimed to test whether variability of the environment is correlated with flexibility. We compared woodpecker finches from a dry area (hereafter, Arid Zone), where food availability is variable, with individuals from a cloud forest (hereafter, Scalesia zone) where food abundance is stable. As parameters for flexibility, we measured neophilia and neophobia, which are two aspects of reaction to novelty, reversal learning and problem-solving. We found no differences in performance on a problem-solving task but, in line with our prediction, individuals from the Arid Zone were significantly faster reversal learners and more neophilic than their conspecifics from the Scalesia zone. The latter result supports the notion that environmental variability drives flexibility. In contrast to our prediction, Arid Zone birds were even more neophobic than birds from the Scalesia Zone. The latter result could be the consequence of differences in predation pressure between the two vegetation zones.

The ability to unlearn a previously established association is an important component of behavioural flexibility and may vary according to species ecology. Previously, two closely related sympatric Darwin’s finches were found to differ in their learning abilities. Small tree finches (Camarhynchus parvulus) outperformed woodpecker finches (Cactospiza pallida) in reversal learning but performed worse in an operant task. We attributed this difference to the habit of woodpecker finches to engage in long bouts of energetic pecking during extractive foraging. Persistently repeating one action without reward could favour performance in operant tasks but also limit behavioural flexibility. Here, we tested whether perseverance is the reason for woodpecker finches’ depressed reversal learning performance. Two new reversal conditions allowed the disentanglement of two sources of error in reversal learning: perseverant choice of the previously rewarded stimulus and failure to respond to the previously non‐rewarded stimulus. For the within‐species comparison, we predicted that woodpecker finches should find it more difficult to learn to avoid the previously rewarded stimulus than learning to choose the previously non‐rewarded stimulus. For the species comparison, we predicted the woodpecker finches should make more errors of perseverance than small tree finches. As performance could also be influenced by reaction to novelty, we compared neophobic responses between species and related them to reversal learning proficiency. We found no significant difference in reversal learning in the predicted direction, but found a negative correlation between neophobia and reversal learning at the inter‐ and the intraspecific level, which points towards a general relationship between reaction to novelty and flexibility.