Red Junglefowl Chicks Seek Contact With Humans During Foraging Task

Abstract

Contact seeking with humans is documented in some domestic animals, mainly dogs, which have advanced communication skills. Domestication as a companion animal is thought to underlie this ability. However, also domesticated horses and goats display similar human-directed behaviors. This suggests either a broader effect of domestication on contact-seeking behavior, or alternatively, that social interactions with humans can result in the development of human contact seeking. As part of another study, we observed contact-seeking behavior in juvenile red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) chicks exposed to behavioral training since hatching, during a foraging task, where chicks were singly required to collect food rewards in a familiar arena using odor cues. If chicks left the arena, we recorded if they approached and looked up at the experimenter, or if they approached other objects (including another human). Chicks approached the experimenter significantly more often than they approached other objects. This behavior was not linked to a fast performance in the test arena, which gave some birds more time to explore the surroundings, or to learning ability measured in a cognitive task. Yet, the preference for the experimenter was lower for chicks that were handled more prior to the experiment. Also, approach probability was positively correlated with escape attempts in a novel arena test. The observed variation in approach behavior suggests a link to aspects of personality, and exposure to human interactions and experimental procedures. Our observations suggest that, although neither domesticated nor selectively bred, red junglefowl that are socialized with humans can potentially develop behavior used to describe contact seeking. Together with evidence from cognitive and behavioral studies, our results suggest that social experiences, not only domestication, can affect human-animal interactions. We propose how interactions between behavior, cognition and handling could be studied further in controlled settings to validate the preliminary findings of our study and uncover the underlying mechanisms.

Do domestic budgerigars perceive predation risk?

“…In the present experiment, this result was probably due to the unfamiliar human dummy model being chosen instead of the budgerigars’ keeper. Previous studies have shown that red junglefowl chicks that engage in frequent contact (e.g., being hugged and talked to) with an experimenter are more likely to approach the experimenter than a stranger (Rubene and Løvlie 2021 ). Moreover, predator size affects the intensity of prey anti-predatory behavior, and the prey often must react more quickly to avoid larger predators (Preisser and Orrock 2012 ; Templeton et al 2005 ).…”

Increased dietary 5-hydroxytryptophan reduces fearfulness in red junglefowl hens (Gallus gallus)

“…All hens were tested individually and had previously taken part in behavioural studies and were used to human presence and handling ( Rubene and Løvlie, 2021 ; Garnham et al, 2022a ). During testing, all hens were exposed to a tonic immobility test (see below) twice: once on the day before the experimental dietary manipulation began and once on the day after the final dose (i.e., 5 days later).…”

Variation in inhibitory control does not influence social rank, foraging efficiency, or risk taking, in red junglefowl females

“…Red junglefowl naturally form social hierarchies in which high ranking individuals produce more offspring (Collias et al 1994), forage on food which can be patchily distributed and vary in ease of access (e.g., seeds, fruits, and invertebrates, Collias and Collias 1967), and are a prey species in their natural habitat (Evans et al 1993;Schaller 1984Borah et al 2009). This, along with that red junglefowl are increasingly used for behavioral and cognitive studies (e.g., Boddington et al 2020, Rubene and Løvlie 2021, reviewed in Garnham and Løvlie 2018, made them ideal for this study.…”