Advertisement

Problem-solving in a cooperative task in peach-fronted conures (Eupsittula aurea)

  • Sara Torres OrtizEmail author
  • Alejandro Corregidor Castro
  • Thorsten Johannes Skovbjerg Balsby
  • Ole Næsbye Larsen
Original Paper

Abstract

Cooperation is a complex behaviour found in many kinds of organisms and occurs between individuals of the same and different species. Several studies have examined the intentionality of this behaviour by testing the animals’ understanding of the need for a partner when working in pairs. The mammalian species tested express such understanding, whereas most tested birds fail, especially when the test involves a delayed access to the setup by one of the co-operators. In the present study, the cooperative problem-solving capability of four peach-fronted conures (Eupsittula aurea) was investigated with the loose string test. All four parrots solved the paradigm by simultaneously pulling the ends of the same string to bring a platform with a food reward within reach. They were also capable of solving the task when one of the co-operators was delayed, even when visually isolated from each other. To further test their comprehension and to exclude the birds relying on task-associated cues, we video-recorded the trials and quantified possible cues and strategies for timing the pulling behaviour (e.g., sound of the partner’s door when opening, sound of steps of partner approaching). The preferred cue to start pulling was to wait for their partner’s arrival to the string. The number of vocalisations was significantly higher during visually isolated conditions and for successful trials compared to failed trials, suggesting possible information exchange. Our findings show that peach-fronted conures can solve a cooperative task, and that cooperation success is not determined by external cues or by partner identity or affinity.

Keywords

Collaboration Cooperation Lose string test Parrots Social cognition 

Notes

Acknowledgements

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. We thank Kasper Fjordside for helping with the setup electronics and Angelica Munteanu for assisting in part of data collection. We are grateful to Simeon Smeele and Morgan Martin for comments to improve the manuscript. This project was funded by the Danish Council for Independent Research ǀ Natural Sciences through grants to Ole Næsbye Larsen (DFF-1323-00105).

Supplementary material

10071_2019_1331_MOESM1_ESM.docx (143 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 143 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (MP4 11399 kb)

Supplementary material 3 (MP4 6157 kb)

Supplementary material 4 (MP4 12792 kb)

Supplementary material 5 (MP4 2975 kb)

Supplementary material 6 (MP4 6924 kb)

References

  1. Adam TC (2010) Competition encourages cooperation: client fish receive higher-quality service when cleaner fish compete. Anim Behav 79:1183–1189.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.02.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archetti M, Scheuring I (2012) Game theory of public goods in one-shot social dilemmas without assortment. J Theor Biol 299:9–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2011.06.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Aureli F et al (2008) Fission-fusion dynamics: new research frameworks. Curr Anthropol 49:627–654.  https://doi.org/10.1086/586708 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balsby TJ, Bradbury JW (2009) Vocal matching by orange-fronted conures (Aratinga canicularis). Behav Process 82(2):133–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2009.05.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barclay P (2006) Reputational benefits for altruistic punishment. Evol Hum Behav 27(5):325–344.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.01.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boesch C, Boesch H (1989) Hunting behavior of wild chimpanzees in the Tai National Park. Am J Phys Anthropol 78(4):547–573.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330780410 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradbury JW (2003) Vocal communication in wild parrots. In: de Waal FBM, Tyack PL (eds) Animal social complexity: intelligence, culture and individualized societies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 293–316Google Scholar
  8. Bradbury JW, Balsby TJS (2016) The functions of vocal learning in parrots. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70(3):293–312.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-016-2068-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bremhorst A, Bütler S, Würbel H, Riemer S (2018) Incentive motivation in pet dogs—preference for constant vs varied food rewards. Sci Rep.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-28079-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Brightsmith DJ, Hobson EA, Martinez G (2018) Food availability and breeding season as predictors of geophagy in Amazonian parrots. Ibis 160(1):112–129.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.12515 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bshary R, Grutter AS (2006) Image scoring and cooperation in a cleaner fish mutualism. Nature 441:975.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04755 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Carere C, Locurto C (2011) Interaction between animal personality and animal cognition. Curr Zool 57(4):491–498.  https://doi.org/10.1093/czoolo/57.4.491 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chalmeau R, Lardeux K, Brandibas P, Gallo A (1997) Cooperative problem solving by orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). Int J Primatol 18(1):23–32.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026337006136 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dearing MD, Foley WJ, McLean S (2005) The influence of plant secondary metabolites on the nutritional ecology of herbivorous terrestrial vertebrates. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:169–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Diamond J, Bond AB (1999) Kea, bird of paradox: the evolution and behavior of a New Zealand parrot. University of California Press, BerkeleyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Duguid S, Wyman E, Bullinger AF, Herfurth-Majstorovic K, Tomasello M (2014) Coordination strategies of chimpanzees and human children in a Stag Hunt game. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 281:20141973.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.1973 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eldakar OT, Farrell DL, Wilson DS (2007) Selfish punishment: altruism can be maintained by competition among cheaters. J Theor Biol 249(2):198–205.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2007.07.024 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Freeberg TM (2006) Social complexity can drive vocal complexity: group size influences vocal information in Carolina chickadees. Psychol Sci 17(7):557–561.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01743.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hattori Y, Kuroshima H, Fujita K (2005) Cooperative problem solving by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella): spontaneous division of labor, communication, and reciprocal altruism. J Comp Psychol 119:335.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.119.3.335 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Heaney M, Gray RD, Taylor AH (2017) Keas perform similarly to chimpanzees and elephants when solving collaborative tasks. PLoS One 12(2):e0169799.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169799 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Heinsohn R, Legge S (1999) The cost of helping. Trends Ecol Evol 14(2):53–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01545-6) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Heinsohn R, Ebert D, Legge S, Peakall R (2007) Genetic evidence for cooperative polyandry in reverse dichromatic Eclectus parrots. Anim Behav 74(4):1047–1054.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.01.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hirata S, Fuwa K (2007) Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) learn to act with other individuals in a cooperative task. Primates 48(1):13–21.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10329006-0022-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Jaakkola K, Guarino E, Donegan K, King SL (2018) Bottlenose dolphins can understand their partner’s role in a cooperative task. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 285(1887):20180948.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.0948 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jelbert SA, Singh PJ, Gray RD, Taylor AH (2015) New Caledonian crows rapidly solve a collaborative problem without cooperative cognition. PLoS One 10:e0133253.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133253 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Juniper T, Parr M (1998) Parrots: a guide to parrots of the world. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  27. Massen JJ, Ritter C, Bugnyar T (2015) Tolerance and reward equity predict cooperation in ravens (Corvus corax). Sci Rep 5:15021.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep15021 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Melis AP, Tomasello M (2019) Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) coordinate by communicating in a collaborative problem-solving task. Proc Biol Sci 286(1901):20190408.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.0408 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Melis AP, Hare B, Tomasello M (2006a) Chimpanzees recruit the best collaborators. Science 311(5765):1297–1300.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1123007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Melis AP, Hare B, Tomasello M (2006b) Engineering cooperation in chimpanzees: tolerance constraints on cooperation. Anim Behav 72(2):275–286.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.09.018 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mendres KA, de Waal FB (2000) Capuchins do cooperate: the advantage of an intuitive task. Anim Behav 60:523–529.  https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1512 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Milinski M (1987) TIT FOR TAT in sticklebacks and the evolution of cooperation. Nature 325:433–435.  https://doi.org/10.1038/325433a0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Mitani JC (2009) Male chimpanzees form enduring and equitable social bonds. Anim Behav 77(3):633–640.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.11.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Noë R (2006) Cooperation experiments: coordination through communication versus acting apart together. Anim Behav 71:1–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.03.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peron F, Rat-Fischer L, Lalot M, Nagle L, Bovet D (2011) Cooperative problem solving in African grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus). Anim Cogn 14(4):545–553.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-011-0389-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Ratnieks FL, Wenseleers T (2008) Altruism in insect societies and beyond: voluntary or enforced? Trends Ecol Evol 23(1):45–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2007.09.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Scheid C, Noe R (2010) The performance of rooks in a cooperative task depends on their temperament. Anim Cogn 13(3):545–553.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s100710090305-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Schwing R, Jocteur E, Wein A, Noë R, Massen JJ (2016) Kea cooperate better with sharing affiliates. Anim Cogn 19:1093–1102.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-1017-y CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Seed AM, Jensen K (2011) Animal behaviour: large-scale cooperation. Nature 472(7344):424–425.  https://doi.org/10.1038/472424a CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Seed AM, Clayton NS, Emery NJ (2008) Cooperative problem solving in rooks (Corvus frugilegus). Proc Biol Sci 275(1641):1421–1429.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.0111 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Shultz S, Opie C, Atkinson QD (2011) Stepwise evolution of stable sociality in primates. Nature 479(7372):219–222.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10601 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Stevens JR, Hauser MD (2004) Why be nice? Psychological constraints on the evolution of cooperation. Trends Cogn Sci 8(2):60–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.12.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Team RC (2013) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. http://www.R-project.org
  44. Tennie C, Jensen K, Call J (2016) The nature of prosociality in chimpanzees. Nat Commun 7:13915.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13915 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Torres Ortiz S, Maxwell A, Krasheninnikova A, Wahlberg M, Larsen ON (2019) Problem solving capabilities of peach-fronted conures (Eupsittula aurea) studied with the string-pulling test. Behaviour.  https://doi.org/10.1163/1568539x00003539 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walløe S, Thomsen H, Balsby TJ, Dabelsteen TJB (2015) Differences in short-term vocal learning in parrots, a comparative study. Behaviour 152(11):1433–1461.  https://doi.org/10.1163/1568539X-00003286 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wilkinson GS (1984) Reciprocal food sharing in the vampire bat. Nature 308(5955):181–184.  https://doi.org/10.1038/308181a0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdense MDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Bioscience-Wildlife EcologyAarhus UniversityRøndeDenmark

Personalised recommendations