![]() While classical interpretations of tool use refer to it as the employment of an external object to manipulate a target (object, substrate or another individual see St Amant & Horton, 2008 Shumaker et al., 2011), a recently proposed approach reconceptualises the phenomenon by considering “tooling” a special form of problem solving. In contrast, flexible tool use may involve individual learning which can subsequently be spread socially and thus must not necessarily be adopted throughout the whole population (Biro et al., 2013). Stereotyped tool use is often shared on a species-wide level and seems to involve a genetic predisposition, which has been suggested to initially result from object related mechanical actions (Hunt et al., 2013) with an adaptive value large enough to become naturally selected for (Biro et al., 2013). Several researchers (Biro et al., 2013 Call, 2013) emphasise the necessity to distinguish between “stereotyped” and “flexible” tool use, which may represent two opposing extremes along a continuum as both types of tool use have arguably formed as a result of different selection pressures (Alcock, 1972 Hunt et al., 2013). Therefore, we try to examine environmental factors that might have driven the Goffin’s cockatoos behavioural flexibility which has led to the innovation of tool use in captivity (Auersperg et al., 2012). A crucial next step for our understanding of why these cognitive abilities exist in Goffin’s cockatoos is to investigate the ecological framework in which this species has evolved. It was also shown that they keep their tools safe in between foraging bouts (Auersperg et al., 2017). The birds respond flexibly, not only when choosing a tool, but also when making different tools from different materials depending on the problem at hand (Auersperg et al., 2016 Laumer et al., 2016, 2017 Habl & Auersperg, 2017 Auersperg et al., in press). Tool use innovations can be transmitted to naïve individuals by emulation learning and tool-using subjects are thereafter able to independently innovate tool manufacture (Auersperg et al., 2014). Most notably, these animals have innovatively manufactured and used tools (Auersperg et al., 2012 see also Osuna-Mascaró & Auersperg, 2018). Studies focusing on impulse control (Auersperg et al., 2013b), the ability to follow invisible object trajectories (Auersperg et al., 2014), reasoning based on inferences in different contexts (Auersperg et al., 2013a O’Hara et al., 2015), sequential problem solving (Auersperg et al., 2013a, b) and extensive combinatory object play (Auersperg et al., 2014a, 2015) highlight various areas of cognition in which this species has proven proficient. We discuss how the efficiency of (extractive) foraging may preclude tool use in wild Goffin’s cockatoos, even though the corresponding cognitive and ecological prerequisites seem to be present.Ĭaptive Goffin’s cockatoos ( Cacatua goffiniana) exhibit a series of advanced cognitive abilities. ![]() These ecological and behavioural characteristics fall in line with current hypotheses regarding the evolution of complex cognition and innovativeness. ![]() Furthermore, several food types require different extraction techniques. Observational data suggests that Goffin’s cockatoos rely on a large variety of partially seasonal resources. Here we provide first insights into the feeding- and socio-ecology of the wild Goffin’s cockatoos and propose potential links between their behaviour in natural settings and their advanced problem-solving capacities shown in captivity. However, little is known about the ecology of these cockatoos, endemic to the Tanimbar Islands in Indonesia. ![]() Most importantly, this species has shown the ability to manufacture and use tools. When tested under laboratory conditions, Goffin’s cockatoos ( Cacatua goffiniana) demonstrate numerous sophisticated cognitive skills. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |