4.6 Article

Not bird-brained: Chickens use prior experience to solve novel timing problems

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 18, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282667

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite differences in brain anatomy, birds have demonstrated human-like abilities such as planning and problem-solving. This study showed that domesticated chickens can use past experience to solve novel problems, similar to pigeons. The findings suggest that basic forms of learning may be more flexible across species than previously assumed.
Despite differences between bird and human brain anatomy, birds have recently demonstrated capacities thought to be uniquely human, including planning and problem-solving. Many avian demonstrations of 'complex' behaviors rely on species-specific behavior (e.g., caching, tool use), or use birds who have evolved largely in similarly undomesticated circumstances (e.g., pigeons). In the present experiment, we asked how a species domesticated thousands of years ago, chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus), used past experience to navigate novel problems in the double-bisection task. The double-bisection task which has been used extensively with pigeons, allowing a comparison of signatures of chicken and pigeon performance on the same task. Our findings revealed chickens, like pigeons, show flexible learning that is sensitive to the broader context in which events occur. Further, as with pigeons, our chickens' patterns of performance could be divided into two distinct categories which may reflect differences in the specific behaviors in which organisms engage during a timing task. Our findings demonstrate remarkable similarity in how chickens and pigeons use past experience to navigate novel problems. Further, these findings add to a growing body of knowledge suggesting the simplest forms of learning common across species-operant and respondent conditioning-are more flexible than is typically assumed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据