A previous study failed to find evidence that dogs could use olfactory cues to discriminate between 1 and 5 hot dog slices presented on a single trial (Horowitz et al., Learning and Motivation, 44, 207–217, 2013). In the experiments reported here, multiple trials were used to test dogs’ ability to use olfaction to choose one of two opaque containers under which a larger number of food items was placed. In Experiment 1, dogs chose between 1 and 5 hot dog slices. In Experiments 2 and 3, we examined dogs’ ability to discriminate between numbers of hot dog slices that varied in the numerical distance and the ratio between the smaller and larger quantities. Experiment 4 explored olfactory discrimination between quantities of a different food, dog kibble. Experiments 1–3 all showed that dogs used olfactory stimuli to choose the larger number of hot dog slices, but Experiments 2 and 3 revealed no effects of distance or ratio between numerical quantities. In Experiment 4, dogs failed to discriminate between 1 and 5 pieces of dog kibble. Factors that allow dogs to use olfactory cues to discriminate between quantities are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Beran, M. J. (2001). Summation and numerousness judgments of sequentially presented sets of items by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 115, 181–191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.115.2.181
Brannon, E. M., & Merritt, D. J. (2011). Evolutionary foundations of the approximate number system. In S. Dehaene & E. Brannon (Eds.), Space, time and number in the brain: Searching for the foundations of mathematical thought (pp. 207–224). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385948-8.00014-1
Cablk, M. E., Sagebiel, J. C., Heaton, J. S., & Valentin, C. (2008). Olfaction-based detection distance: A quantitative analysis of how far away dogs recognize tortoise odor and follow it to source. Sensors, 8, 2208–2222. https://doi.org/10.3390/s8042208
Dehaene, S. (2001). Subtracting pigeons: Logarithmic or linear? Psychological Science, 12, 244–246. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00343
Dehaene, S., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., & Cohen, L. (1998). Abstract representations of numbers in the animal and human brain. Trends in Neurosciences, 21, 355–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/SO166-2236(98)01263-6
Horowitz, A., Hecht, J., & Dedrick, A. (2013). Smelling more or less: Investigating the olfactory experience of the domestic dog. Learning and Motivation, 44, 207–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2013.02.002
Kalmus, H. (1955). The discrimination by the nose of the dog of individual human odours and in particular of the odours of twins. The British Journal of Animal Behaviour, 3, 25–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5601(55)80072-X
King, J. E., Becker, R. F., & Markee, J. E. (1964). Studies on olfactory discrimination in dogs: (3) Ability to detect human odour trace. Animal Behaviour, 12, 311–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(64)90017-X
Krichbaum, S., Rogers, B., Cox, E., Waggoner, L. P., & Katz, J. S. (2020). Odor span task in dogs (Canis familiaris). Animal Cognition, 23, 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-020-01362-7
Lo, K. H., Macpherson, K., MacDonald, H., & Roberts, W. A. (2019). A comparative study of memory for olfactory discriminations: Dogs (Canis familiaris), rats (Rattus norvegicus), and humans (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 134, 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000205
Lo, K. H., & Roberts, W. A. (2019). Dogs (Canis familiaris) use odor cues to show episodic-like memory for what, where, and when. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 133, 428–441. https://doi.org/10.1037/com0000174
Macpherson, K., & Roberts, W. A. (2013). Can dogs count? Learning and Motivation, 44, 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2013.04.002
Nieder, A. (2019). A brain for numbers: The biology of the number instinct. MIT Press.
Petrazzini, M. E. M., Mantese, F., & Prato-Previde, E. (2020). Food quantity discrimination in puppies (Canis lupus familiaris). Animal Cognition, 23, 703–710. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-020-01378-z
Petrazzini, M. E. M., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2016). What counts for dogs (Canis lupus familiaris) in a quantity discrimination task? Behavioural Processes, 122, 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2015.11.013
Piazza, M. (2010). Neurocognitive start-up tools for symbolic number representations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 542–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.008
Plotnik, J. M., Brubaker, D. L., Dale, R., Tiller, L. N., Mumby, H. S., & Clayton, N. S. (2019). Elephants have a nose for quantity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116, 12566–12571. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1818284116
Polgár, Z., Kinnunen, M., Újváry, D., Miklósi, Á., & Gácsi, M. (2016). A test of canine olfactory capacity: Comparing various dog breeds and wolves in a natural detection task. PLOS ONE, 11, Article e0154087. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154087
Quignon, P., Giraud, M., Rimbault, M., Lavigne, P., Tacher, S., Morin, E., Retout, E., Valin, A., Lindblad-Toh, K., Nicolas, J., & Galibert, F. (2005). The dog and rat olfactory receptor repertoires. Genome Biology, 6, R83. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2005-6-10-r83
Roberts, W. A. (2005). How do pigeons represent numbers?: Studies of number scale bisection. Behavioural Processes, 69(1), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2005.01.005
Roberts, W. A. (2010). Distance and magnitude effects in sequential number discrimination by pigeons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36, 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017226
Rouquier, S., Taviaux, S., Trask, B. J., Brand-Arpon, V., van den Engh, G., Demaille, J., & Giorgi, D. (1998). Distribution of olfactory receptor genes in the human genome. Nature Genetics, 18, 243–250. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng0398-243
Rowe, C. (1999). Receiver psychology and the evolution of multicomponent signals. Animal Behaviour, 58, 921–931. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1999.1242
Ward, C., & Smuts, B. B. (2007). Quantity-based judgments in the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris). Animal Cognition, 10, 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-006-0042-7
Wye, M. V. (2010). U.S. Publication Number: US 2010/0095896 A1. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Zozulya, S., Echeverri, F., & Nguyen, T. (2001). The human olfactory receptor repertoire. Genome Biology, 2, Article research0018.1. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2001-2-6-research0018
Support for this research was provided by a Discovery Grant from the Canadian Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council to W. A. Roberts.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Jackson, S.M., Martin, G.K. & Roberts, W.A. The olfactory capability of dogs to discriminate between different quantities of food. Learn Behav (2021). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-021-00463-8
- Quantity discrimination
- Distance effect
- Ratio effect
- Food type