Counting Chicks Before They Hatch

White, David J.; Ho, Lucy; Freed-Brown, Grace

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02418.x

Cited by 72 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Few prior studies distinguished number from area or mass in the animals’ natural quantitative behavior (Gallistel, 1989; Hunt, Low, & Burns, 2008). Some prior field studies explored the role of quantitative cognition in brood parasitism and intergroup encounters, but left ambiguous whether subjects represented number or alternative dimensions (White, Ho, & Freed-Brown, 2009; McComb, Packer, & Pusey, 1994; Wilson, Hauser, & Wrangham, 2001). In most studies, number is confounded with an alternative dimension such as surface area (for visual objects such as food, offspring, or conspecifics) or volume and duration (for auditory stimuli such as vocalizations).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

True Numerical Cognition in the Wild

Piantadosi

Cantlon

2017

Psychol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive and neural research over the past few decades has produced sophisticated models of the representations and algorithms underlying numerical reasoning in humans and other animals. These models make precise predictions for how humans and other animals should behave when faced with quantitative decisions, yet primarily have been tested only in laboratory tasks. We use data from wild baboon troop movements recently reported in Strandburg-Peshkin, Farine, Couzin, and Crofoot (2015) to compare a variety of known models of quantitative decision making. We show that the decisions made by these naturally-behaving wild animals rely specifically on numerical representations, with key homologies to human numerical representations and psychophysics. These findings provide important new data on the types of problems human numerical cognition was designed to solve and represent the first robust evidence of true numerical reasoning in the wild.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

True Numerical Cognition in the Wild

Piantadosi

Cantlon

2017

Psychol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A second argument arises from the behaviour of Common Swifts at the nest on day 1 before solar noon. If the nature of the induction was visual, one would first expect to observe female contact with the egg to last only a few seconds or minutes, as is typical of species (obligate brood parasites) that rely upon a visual input to control clutch size (Chance 1940, Haywood 1993c, White et al 2009). I would also expect parents to leave the nest mostly unattended on the morning the first egg is laid, as (1) this is a time of high energy demand for females, and (2) incubation starts when the clutch is complete or sometimes, in three-egg clutches, with the penultimate egg (Lack 1956b).…”

Section: Tactile Stimulation As Inductive Signalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory control of clutch size in the Common Swift Apus apus

Haywood

2013

Ibis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clutch size varies among individuals in most bird species. A widespread assumption is that such variation results from variable timing in the disruption of ovarian follicular growth that brings, with a few days' lag, egg-laying to an end. Currently, there is empirical evidence that this is the case in Blue Tits Cyanistes caeruleus but not in Zebra Finches Taeniopygia guttata, in which the timing of follicular disruption has been shown to be invariant. Here, I investigate clutch size regulation of Common Swifts Apus apus. Using experimental egg removal, I show that, assuming the female gets enough egg contact, the determination of clutch size occurs at noon solar time on the day the first egg of a clutch is laid. In spite of individual variation in clutch size, there was no hint of any variability in the timing of clutch-size determination. In this species therefore, the timing of the signal disrupting follicular growth appears invariant. The physiological mechanism that controls clutch size is discussed, including the existence of an endogenous circadian clock and potential zeitgeber, the developmental range of clutch size for the species, the sensory nature of the input that triggers follicular disruption, and the stress of laying extra eggs.

show abstract

“…Field studies have documented that being able to process numerical information is advantageous in several ecological contexts [1], [2] while laboratory studies have provided evidence of rudimentary numerical abilities in animals as diverse as mammals [3], [4], [5], [6], birds [7], [8], [9], amphibians [10], fish [11], [12], [13] and social insects [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Large Number Discrimination by Mosquitofish

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRecent studies have demonstrated that fish display rudimentary numerical abilities similar to those observed in mammals and birds. The mechanisms underlying the discrimination of small quantities (<4) were recently investigated while, to date, no study has examined the discrimination of large numerosities in fish.Methodology/Principal FindingsSubjects were trained to discriminate between two sets of small geometric figures using social reinforcement. In the first experiment mosquitofish were required to discriminate 4 from 8 objects with or without experimental control of the continuous variables that co-vary with number (area, space, density, total luminance). Results showed that fish can use the sole numerical information to compare quantities but that they preferentially use cumulative surface area as a proxy of the number when this information is available. A second experiment investigated the influence of the total number of elements to discriminate large quantities. Fish proved to be able to discriminate up to 100 vs. 200 objects, without showing any significant decrease in accuracy compared with the 4 vs. 8 discrimination. The third experiment investigated the influence of the ratio between the numerosities. Performance was found to decrease when decreasing the numerical distance. Fish were able to discriminate numbers when ratios were 1∶2 or 2∶3 but not when the ratio was 3∶4. The performance of a sample of undergraduate students, tested non-verbally using the same sets of stimuli, largely overlapped that of fish.Conclusions/SignificanceFish are able to use pure numerical information when discriminating between quantities larger than 4 units. As observed in human and non-human primates, the numerical system of fish appears to have virtually no upper limit while the numerical ratio has a clear effect on performance. These similarities further reinforce the view of a common origin of non-verbal numerical systems in all vertebrates.

show abstract

Counting Chicks Before They Hatch

Cited by 72 publications

References 23 publications

True Numerical Cognition in the Wild

True Numerical Cognition in the Wild

Sensory control of clutch size in the Common Swift Apus apus

Large Number Discrimination by Mosquitofish

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About