1
|
Laumer IB, Massen JJM, Boehm PM, Boehm A, Geisler A, Auersperg AMI. Correction: Individual Goffin´s cockatoos (Cacatua goffiniana) show flexible targeted helping in a tool transfer task. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0316744. [PMID: 39775687 PMCID: PMC11684585 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0316744] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/11/2025] Open
Abstract
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253416.].
Collapse
|
2
|
Piseddu A, van Zeeland YRA, Rault JL. What we (don't) know about parrot welfare: Finding welfare indicators through a systematic literature review. Anim Welf 2024; 33:e57. [PMID: 39703222 PMCID: PMC11655281 DOI: 10.1017/awf.2024.61] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/16/2024] [Revised: 09/30/2024] [Accepted: 10/29/2024] [Indexed: 12/21/2024]
Abstract
Parrots are popular companion animals but show prevalent and at times severe welfare issues. Nonetheless, there are no scientific tools available to assess parrot welfare. The aim of this systematic review was to identify valid and feasible outcome measures that could be used as welfare indicators for companion parrots. From 1,848 peer-reviewed studies retrieved, 98 met our inclusion and exclusion criteria (e.g. experimental studies, captive parrots). For each outcome collected, validity was assessed based on the statistical significance reported by the authors, as other validity parameters were rarely provided for evaluation. Feasibility was assigned by considering the need for specific instruments, veterinary-level expertise or handling the parrot. A total of 1,512 outcomes were evaluated, of which 572 had a significant P-value and were considered feasible. These included changes in behaviour (e.g. activity level, social interactions, exploration), body measurements (e.g. body weight, plumage condition) and abnormal behaviours, amongst others. Many physical and physiological parameters were identified that either require experimental validation, or veterinary-level skills and expertise, limiting their potential use by parrot owners themselves. Moreover, a high risk of bias undermined the internal validity of these outcomes, while a strong taxonomic bias, a predominance of studies on parrots in laboratories, and an underrepresentation of companion parrots jeopardised their external validity. These results provide a promising starting point for validating a set of welfare indicators in parrots.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Piseddu
- Centre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210Vienna, Austria
| | - Yvonne RA van Zeeland
- Division of Zoological Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 108, 3584CMUtrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Jean-Loup Rault
- Centre for Animal Nutrition and Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinaerplatz 1, 1210Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kopp KS, Kanngiesser P, Brügger RK, Daum MM, Gampe A, Köster M, van Schaik CP, Liebal K, Burkart JM. The proximate regulation of prosocial behaviour: towards a conceptual framework for comparative research. Anim Cogn 2024; 27:5. [PMID: 38429436 PMCID: PMC10907469 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-024-01846-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/07/2023] [Revised: 10/14/2023] [Accepted: 11/13/2023] [Indexed: 03/03/2024]
Abstract
Humans and many other animal species act in ways that benefit others. Such prosocial behaviour has been studied extensively across a range of disciplines over the last decades, but findings to date have led to conflicting conclusions about prosociality across and even within species. Here, we present a conceptual framework to study the proximate regulation of prosocial behaviour in humans, non-human primates and potentially other animals. We build on psychological definitions of prosociality and spell out three key features that need to be in place for behaviour to count as prosocial: benefitting others, intentionality, and voluntariness. We then apply this framework to review observational and experimental studies on sharing behaviour and targeted helping in human children and non-human primates. We show that behaviours that are usually subsumed under the same terminology (e.g. helping) can differ substantially across and within species and that some of them do not fulfil our criteria for prosociality. Our framework allows for precise mapping of prosocial behaviours when retrospectively evaluating studies and offers guidelines for future comparative work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathrin S Kopp
- Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany.
- Life Sciences, Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany.
- Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Patricia Kanngiesser
- Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Rahel K Brügger
- Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Moritz M Daum
- Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Jacobs Center for Productive Youth Development, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Center for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language Evolution, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Anja Gampe
- Institute of Socio-Economics, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
| | - Moritz Köster
- Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
- Institute of Psychology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
| | - Carel P van Schaik
- Department of Evolutionary Biology & Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Center for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language Evolution, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Katja Liebal
- Life Sciences, Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
- Department of Education and Psychology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Judith M Burkart
- Department of Evolutionary Anthropology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
- Center for the Interdisciplinary Study of Language Evolution, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rössler T, Auersperg AM. Recent developments in parrot cognition: a quadrennial update. Anim Cogn 2023; 26:199-228. [PMID: 36547738 PMCID: PMC9877086 DOI: 10.1007/s10071-022-01733-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2022] [Revised: 12/02/2022] [Accepted: 12/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Psittacines, along with corvids, are commonly referred to as 'feathered apes' due to their advanced cognitive abilities. Until rather recently, the research effort on parrot cognition was lagging behind that on corvids, however current developments show that the number of parrot studies is steadily increasing. In 2018, M. L. Lambert et al. provided a comprehensive review on the status of the most important work done so far in parrot and corvid cognition. Nevertheless, only a little more than 4 years after this publication, more than 50 new parrot studies have been published, some of them chartering completely new territory. On the 25th anniversary of Animal Cognition we think this warrants a detailed review of parrot cognition research over the last 4 years. We aim to capture recent developments and current trends in this rapidly expanding and diversifying field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theresa Rössler
- Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Medical University Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria ,grid.10420.370000 0001 2286 1424Department of Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Alice M. Auersperg
- Messerli Research Institute, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Medical University Vienna, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Verspeek J, van Leeuwen EJC, Laméris DW, Staes N, Stevens JMG. Adult bonobos show no prosociality in both prosocial choice task and group service paradigm. PeerJ 2022; 10:e12849. [PMID: 35178297 PMCID: PMC8815371 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.12849] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2021] [Accepted: 01/07/2022] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Previous studies reported contrasting conclusions concerning bonobo prosociality, which are likely due to differences in the experimental design, the social dynamics among subjects and characteristics of the subjects themselves. Two hypotheses have been proposed to explain the occurrence of prosociality in animals: the cooperative breeding hypothesis and the self-domestication hypothesis. While the former predicts low levels of prosociality in bonobos because they are non-cooperative breeders, the latter predicts high levels of prosociality because self-domestication has been proposed to select for high levels of tolerance in this species. Here, we presented a group of thirteen bonobos with two platform food-provisioning tasks: the prosocial choice task (PCT) and the group service paradigm (GSP). The latter has so far never been applied to bonobos. To allow for free choice of participation and partner, we implemented both tasks in a group setting. Like in previous PCT studies, bonobos did not choose the prosocial option more often when a group member could benefit vs not benefit. In the GSP, where food provisioning is costly, only subadult bonobos showed a limited amount of food provisioning, which was much lower than what was previously reported for chimpanzees. In both experiments, adult subjects were highly motivated to obtain rewards for themselves, suggesting that bonobos behaved indifferently to the gains of group members. We suggest that previous positive food-provisioning prosociality results in bonobos are mainly driven by the behaviour of subadult subjects. The lack of prosociality in this study corresponds to the hypothesis that proactive food provisioning co-occurs with cooperative breeding and suggests that proactive prosociality might not be part of the self-domestication syndrome in bonobos.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonas Verspeek
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Edwin J. C. van Leeuwen
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Daan W. Laméris
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Nicky Staes
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
| | - Jeroen M. G. Stevens
- Centre for Research and Conservation, Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium
- Behavioural Ecology and Ecophysiology Group, Department of Biology, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium
- SALTO, Agro- and Biotechnology, Odisee University College, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
In mixed company: two macaws are self-regarding in a symbolic prosocial choice task. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s00265-021-03123-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
|
7
|
Horn L, Zewald JS, Bugnyar T, Massen JJM. Carrion Crows and Azure-Winged Magpies Show No Prosocial Tendencies When Tested in a Token Transfer Paradigm. Animals (Basel) 2021; 11:1526. [PMID: 34073851 PMCID: PMC8225188 DOI: 10.3390/ani11061526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2021] [Revised: 05/12/2021] [Accepted: 05/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
To study the evolution of humans' cooperative nature, researchers have recently sought comparisons with other species. Studies investigating corvids, for example, showed that carrion crows and azure-winged magpies delivered food to group members when tested in naturalistic or simple experimental paradigms. Here, we investigated whether we could replicate these positive findings when testing the same two species in a token transfer paradigm. After training the birds to exchange tokens with an experimenter for food rewards, we tested whether they would also transfer tokens to other birds, when they did not have the opportunity to exchange the tokens themselves. To control for the effects of motivation, and of social or stimulus enhancement, we tested each individual in three additional control conditions. We witnessed very few attempts and/or successful token transfers, and those few instances did not occur more frequently in the test condition than in the controls, which would suggest that the birds lack prosocial tendencies. Alternatively, we propose that this absence of prosociality may stem from the artificial nature and cognitive complexity of the token transfer task. Consequently, our findings highlight the strong impact of methodology on animals' capability to exhibit prosocial tendencies and stress the importance of comparing multiple experimental paradigms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Horn
- Department of Behavioral and Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstraße 14, 1090 Vienna, Austria; (T.B.); (J.J.M.M.)
| | - Jeroen S. Zewald
- Animal Behavior and Cognition, Department of Biology, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands;
| | - Thomas Bugnyar
- Department of Behavioral and Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstraße 14, 1090 Vienna, Austria; (T.B.); (J.J.M.M.)
| | - Jorg J. M. Massen
- Department of Behavioral and Cognitive Biology, University of Vienna, Althanstraße 14, 1090 Vienna, Austria; (T.B.); (J.J.M.M.)
- Animal Behavior and Cognition, Department of Biology, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands;
| |
Collapse
|