An attempt to confirm magnetic sensitivity in the pigeon,Columba livia

An attempt was made to train two species of small mammals (the bush opossum, Monodelphis domesticus, and the Djungarian hamster, Phodopus sungorus) to search for food in the direction indicated by an earth-strength magnetic field. Five opossums and 4 hamsters were tested in a cross-shaped arena whose four arms faced geographic north, south, east, and west. A set of coils generated a magnetic field whose north pole could be randomly pointed toward any arm. A subject was given a food reward if it entered the arm indicated by the north direction of the field. In 12 series of 73 to 1,127 trials each, the subjects were unable to select the appropriate arm with a frequency greater than random. This result contrasts strongly with a variety of published studies on mammals, birds, and other vertebrates that have indicated good ability to determine direction from the earth's magnetic field.Most reported responses of animals to the earth's magnetic field fall into one of two categories: (1) magnetic compass responses-orientation to the direction of the earth's field; or (2) gamma-level responses-changes in orientation or activity correlated with minute fluctuations or disturbances in the earth's field. This paper describes an experiment intended to look for the first of these responses in two species of mammals, the marsupial South American bush opossum (Monodelphis domesticus) and the placental Djungarian hamster (Phodopus sungorus). In another paper, we will report on an attempt to demonstrate the second category of magnetic response in mammals (manuscript in preparation).Compass responses in mammals have been reported for humans and the European woodmouse, Apodemus sylvaticus (Baker, 1980;Mather & Baker, 1981). In addition, Baker, Mather, and Kennaugh (1983) and Kirschvink (1981) report deposits of magnetite in humans that could serve as the basis for a magnetic field receptor. The fact that humans were the subjects of much of this work has resulted in its receiving particularly widespread attention. Two attempts to replicate Baker's work on human orientation have not confirmed his results (Adler & Pelke,

Section: /972 (P > 05)mentioning

confidence: 91%

An attempt to demonstrate magnetic compass orientation in two species of mammals

Madden

Phillips

1987

“…While the actual level of the response was low, the positive result was encouraging. Kreithen and Keeton (1974) and Beaugrand (1976), using 97 and 38 pigeons, respectively, and employing a variety of magnetic fields as stimuli, failed to produce any conditioning of heart-rate activity.Other experimenters have attempted to use magnetic fields as stimuli in operant conditioning paradigms. Meyer and Lambe (1966) used a magnetic field as the discriminative stimulus between variable-interval (VI) 6O-sec schedules and extinction (Ext) components of a multiple schedule.…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

“…I also thank the New Zealand University Grants Committee for equipment grants to Michael Davison and Kreithen and Keeton (1974) and Beaugrand (1976), using 97 and 38 pigeons, respectively, and employing a variety of magnetic fields as stimuli, failed to produce any conditioning of heart-rate activity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A failure to obtain magnetic discrimination in the pigeon

Alsop

1987

Six pigeons were trained on a multiple-concurrent schedule. During both multiple-schedule components, two response keys were available. In Component 1, responses to the left key were reinforced on a variable-interval 45-sec schedule, whereas responses to the right key were not reinforced. In Component 2, these contingencies were reversed. Following each reinforcer, the component next presented was chosen randomly with equal probability. The two components were differentially signaled by presentation of various stimuli during Component 1. Over the course of the experiment, these stimuli were various intensities of light, a noise, and various fluctuating and static magnetic fields. While subjects showed good discrimination of the light and noise stimuli, no stimulus control using the magnetic fields was obtained.Researchers have reported that Earth's magnetic field serves as a stimulus that affects behavior in a variety of species. Studies have shown that mud bacteria (Kalmijn & Blakemore, 1978), bees (Gould, Kirschvink, Deffeyes, & Brines, 1280), flies (Becker, 1963), elasmobranch fish (Kalmijn, 1978), salamanders (Phillips & Alder, 1978), and even humans (Baker, 1980) may be sensitive to magnetic fields. However, the most extensive research in this area has been conducted using avians, in particular, the pigeon.Observations and experiments in the field have provided the bulk of the evidence that pigeons are sensitive to magnetic fields. Such studies have investigated the effects of regional magnetic anomalies on the flight paths of trained homing pigeons (e.g., Walcott, 1978), the effects of attaching magnets to pigeons on subsequent homing (Keeton, 1972;Walcott & Green, 1974), the effects of transportation in inversed vertical magnetic fields on homing (Kiepenheurer, 1978), and the effects of magnetic "storms" on pigeon flight (e.g., Keeton, Larkin, & Windsor, 1974). Naturally, these results have led to laboratory experiments aiming to provide quantitative data on this phenomenon, such as measures of the sensitivity of pigeons to changes in the intensity or the angle of an applied magnetic field. However, the success of this research has been extremely limited.Reille (1968) reported successful classical conditioning of the cardiac rhythm of a pigeon to stimuli consisting of either static or fluctuating magnetic fields of approximately Earth strength. While the actual level of the response was low, the positive result was encouraging. Kreithen and Keeton (1974) and Beaugrand (1976), using 97 and 38 pigeons, respectively, and employing a variety of magnetic fields as stimuli, failed to produce any conditioning of heart-rate activity.Other experimenters have attempted to use magnetic fields as stimuli in operant conditioning paradigms. Meyer and Lambe (1966) used a magnetic field as the discriminative stimulus between variable-interval (VI) 6O-sec schedules and extinction (Ext) components of a multiple schedule. They found no differential control of behavior by the magnetic stimulus. Bookman (1977) and M. Davison...

“…The more recent literature, however, has been mixed. Studies employing conditioning (psychophysical) techniques have continued to give primarily negative results (Alsop, 1987;Beaugrand, 1976Beaugrand, , 1977Carman, Walker, & Lee, 1987;Delius & Emmerton, 1978;Griffin, 1982;Kreithen & Keeton, 1974;McIsaac & Kreithen, 1987; see also Meyer & Lambe, 1966;Neville, 1955;Orgel & Smith, 1954;cf. Bookman, 1977;Reille, 1968).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pigeons fail to detect low-frequency magnetic fields

Moore

Stanhope

Wilcox

1987

In an attempt to resolve basic inconsistencies in the literature on magnetic reception in birds, we tested 4 pigeons for possible sensitivity to low-frequency magnetic fields. Horizontal and vertical components of an earth-strength field were varied at frequencies of 0.01 to 10 Hz. None of the pigeons seemed able to distinguish between varying and static fields, although each received 1,800 trials of discrimination training. These results, related findings, and the reported failure to replicate a critical field study lead the authors to question the prevailing belief that pigeons can detect magnetic fields.Until 1971 most relevant studies indicated that birds were unable to detect magnetic fields (see Keeton, 1971). The more recent literature, however, has been mixed. Studies employing conditioning (psychophysical) techniques have continued to give primarily negative results