Abstract
It is not clear when and how animals start to discriminate between male and female conspecifics and how this distinction drives their social behaviour. A study on pheasants found that 1-week-old chicks (Phasianus colchicus) preferentially aggregated with same-sex peers and this trend became more pronounced through development, suggesting that sexual segregation increases during ontogeny. However, it remains unclear whether this ability depends on experience or develops spontaneously. Using a similar experimental protocol, we investigated whether sex discrimination is present at birth in domestic chickens (Gallus gallus) by testing the social preferences of young chicks with clutch mates. We measured the amount of time spent close to male and female conspecifics in visually inexperienced chicks. Soon after hatching, both males and females preferentially aggregated with females. To clarify whether the experience with conspecifics modifies the initial preference for females, we used an imprinting procedure. We exposed chicks to conspecifics of the same sex, different sex or both sexes for 3 days and then tested their preferences to aggregate with males or females. No sex preference was observed after 3 days of imprinting exposure. The disappearance of the initial sex preference shows that, although chicks can discriminate between conspecifics of different sex, sex segregation does not influence sex preferences in the first week of life. We suggest that the absence of sexual assortment in the first week of age can enhance the social cohesion of the flock.
Significant statement
The ability to discriminate males from females affects a wide range of social behaviours, including the preferences for own sex conspecifics during sex segregation and the choice of a partner in the mating period. However, it remains unclear when and how males and females start to discriminate members of the same/different sex. We tested the domestic chicks to explore whether sex discrimination is present at birth or appears later on. Males and females discriminated between sexes at hatching and preferred to spend more time with female chicks. However, this preference disappeared after exposure to same-sex, different-sex or mixed-sex chicks. The lack of a preference for a specific sex may increase group cohesion postponing the appearance of sex segregation later in life, when chicks move further from their group.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are available as supplementary material.
References
Adkins-Regan E, Krakauer A (2000) Removal of adult males from the rearing environment increases preference for same-sex partners in the zebra finch. Anim Behav 60:47–53. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1448
Amo L, Avilés JM, Parejo D, Peña A, Rodríguez J, Tomás G (2012) Sex recognition by odour and variation in the uropygial gland secretion in starlings. J Anim Ecol 81:605–613. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01940.x
Bateson PPG (1966) The characteristics and context of imprinting. Biol Rev 41:177–217
Bateson PPG (1973) Preferences for familiarity and novelty: a model for the simultaneous development of both. J Theor Biol 41:249–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(73)90117-3
Bateson P (1979) How do sensitive periods arise and what are they for? Anim Behav 27:470–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(79)90184-2
Bateson P (1980) Optimal outbreeding and the development of sexual preferences in Japanese quail. Z Tierpsychol 53:231–244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1980.tb01052.x
Bateson P (1990) Is imprinting such a special case? Phil Trans R Soc B 329:125–131. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1990.0157
Batista G, Hensch TK (2019) Critical period regulation by thyroid hormones: potential mechanisms and sex-specific aspects. Front Mol Neurosci 12:77. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnmol.2019.00077
Bischof HJ (2003) Neural mechanisms of sexual imprinting. Anim Biol 53:89–112. https://doi.org/10.1163/157075603769700313
Bolhuis JJ (1991) Mechanisms of avian imprinting: a review. Biol Rev 66:303–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.1991.tb01145.x
Caspers BA, Hagelin JC, Paul M, Bock S, Willeke S, Krause ET (2017) Zebra Finch chicks recognize parental scent, and retain chemosensory knowledge of their genetic mother, even after egg cross-fostering. Sci Rep 7:12859. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-13110-y
Cheng KM, Shoffner RN, Phillips RE, Lee FB (1979) Mate preference in wild and domesticated (game-farm) mallards: II. Pairing success. Anim Behav 27:417–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(79)90177-5
Clayton NS (1989) Song, sex and sensitive phases in the behavioural development of birds. Trends Ecol Evol 4:82–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(89)90156-0
Di Giorgio E, Loveland JL, Mayer U, Rosa-Salva O, Versace E, Vallortigara G (2017) Filial responses as predisposed and learned preferences: early attachment in chicks and babies. Behav Brain Res 325:90–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2016.09.018
Field J, Muir DW, Pilon R, Sinclair M, Dodwell PC (1980) Infants’ orientation to lateral sounds from birth to three months. Child Dev 51:295–298. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129628
Gottlieb G (1965) Imprinting in relation to parental and species identification by avian neonates. J Comp Physiol Psychol 59:345–356. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022045
Gottlieb G (1974) On the acoustic basis of species identification in wood ducklings (Aix sponsa). J Comp Physiol Psychol 87:1038–1048. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037601
Hess EH (1956) Natural preferences of chicks and ducklings for objects of different colors. Psychol Rep 2:477–483. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2.7.477-48
Hess EH, Gogel WC (1954) Natural preferences of the chick for objects of different colors. J Psychol 38:483–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1954.9712955
Horn G (2004) Pathways of the past: the imprint of memory. Nat Rev Neurosci 5:108–120. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1324
Jackson PS, Bateson PPG (1974) Imprinting and exploration of slight novelty in chicks. Nature 251:609–610. https://doi.org/10.1038/251609a0
Johnson MH, Horn G (1988) Development of filial preferences in dark-reared chicks. Anim Behav 36:675–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(88)80150-7
Johnson MH, Bolhuis JJ, Horn G (1985) Interaction between acquired preferences and developing predispositions during imprinting. Anim Behav 33:1000–1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(85)80034-8
Johnson MH, Dziurawiec S, Ellis H, Morton J (1991) Newborns’ preferential tracking of face-like stimuli and its subsequent decline. Cognition 40:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90045-6
Launay F, Mills AD, Faure JM (1993) Effects of test age, line and sex on tonic immobility responses and social reinstatement behaviour in Japanese quail Coturnix japonica. Behav Process 29:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(93)90023-K
Lemaire BS, Rugani R, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2020) Response of male and female domestic chicks to change in the number (quantity) of imprinting objects. Learn Behav 49:54–66. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-020-00446-1
Leonard ML, Zanette L, Thompson BK, Fairfull RW (1993) Early exposure to the opposite sex affects mating behaviour in White Leghorn chickens. Appl Anim Behav Sci 37:57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(93)90070-6
Lorenzi E, Lemaire BS, Versace E, Matsushima T, Vallortigara G (2020) Resurgence of a perinatal attraction for animate objects via thyroid hormone T3. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.11.16.384289
Madden JR, Whiteside MA (2013) Variation in female mate choice and mating success is affected by sex ratio experienced during early life. Anim Behav 86:139–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.05.003
Matsushima T, Izawa EI, Aoki N, Yanagihara S (2003) The mind through chick eyes: memory, cognition and anticipation. Zool Sci 20:395–408. https://doi.org/10.2108/zsj.20.395
McCabe BJ (2013) Imprinting. WIREs Cogn Sci 4:375–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1231
Mihailova M, Berg ML, Buchanan KL, Bennett AT (2014) Odour-based discrimination of subspecies, species and sexes in an avian species complex, the crimson rosella. Anim Behav 95:155–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.07.012
Miura M, Nishi D, Matsushima T (2020) Combined predisposed preferences for colour and biological motion make robust development of social attachment through imprinting. Anim Cogn 23:169–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-019-01327-5
Muir DW, Clifton RK, Clarkson MG (1989) The development of a human auditory localization response: a U-shaped function. Can J Psychol 43:199–216. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0084220
Nuechterlein GL, Buitron D (1992) Vocal advertising and sex recognition in eared grebes. Condor 94:937–943. https://doi.org/10.2307/1369290
Park T, Balaban E (1991) Relative salience of species maternal calls in neonatal gallinaceous birds: a direct comparison of Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica) and domestic chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). J Comp Psychol 105:45–54. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.105.1.45
R Development Core Team (2018) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria http://www.R-project.org
Regolin L, Vallortigara G (1995) Perception of partly occluded objects by young chicks. Percept Psychophys 57:971–976. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03205456
Rosa-Salva O, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2010) Faces are special for newly hatched chicks: evidence for inborn domain-specific mechanisms underlying spontaneous preferences for face-like stimuli. Developmental Sci 13:565–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00914.x
Rosa-Salva O, Grassi M, Lorenzi E, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2016) Spontaneous preference for visual cues of animacy in naïve domestic chicks: The case of speed changes. Cognition 157:49–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.08.014
Rosa-Salva O, Mayer U, Vallortigara G (2019) Unlearned visual preferences for the head region in domestic chicks. PLoS ONE 14:e0222079. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222079
Rosa-Salva O, Mayer U, Versace E, Hébert M, Lemaire BS, Vallortigara G (2021) Sensitive periods for social development: Interactions between predisposed and learned mechanisms. Cognition, 104552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104552
Salzen EA, Lily RE, McKeown JR (1971) Colour preference and imprinting in domestic chicks. Anim Behav 19:542–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(71)80109-4
Sherrod L (1974) The role of sibling associations in the formation of social and sexual companion preferences in ducks (Anas platyrhynchos): An investigation of the ‘primacy versus recency’ question. Z Tierpsychol 34:247–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.1974.tb01801.x
Simion F, Valenza E, Umilta C, Barba BD (1998) Preferential orienting to faces in newborns: a temporal–nasal asymmetry. J Exp Psychol Human 24:1399–1405. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.5.1399
Taoka M, Okumura H (1990) Sexual differences in flight calls and the cue for vocal sex recognition of swinhoe’s Storm-Petrels. Condor 92:571–575. https://doi.org/10.2307/1368674
ten Cate C (1986) Does behavior contingent stimulus movement enhance filial imprinting in Japanese quail? Dev Psychobiol 19:607–614. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.420190611
Vallortigara G (1992) Affiliation and aggression as related to gender in domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). J Comp Psychol 106:53–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.106.1.53
Vallortigara G, Andrew RJ (1991) Lateralization of response by chicks to change in a model partner. Anim Behav 41:187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80470-1
Vallortigara G, Andrew RJ (1994) Differential involvement of right and left hemisphere in individual recognition in the domestic chick. Behav Process 33:41–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(94)90059-0
Vallortigara G, Regolin L (2006) Gravity bias in the interpretation of biological motion by inexperienced chicks. Curr Biol 16:279–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.03.052
Vallortigara G, Versace E (2018) Filial imprinting. In: Vonk J, Shackelford T (eds) Encyclopedia of animal cognition and behavior. Springer, Cham, pp 1943–1948
Vallortigara G, Zanforlin M (1988) Open-field behavior of young chicks (Gallus gallus): antipredatory responses, social reinstatement motivation, and gender effects. Anim Learn Behav 16:359–362. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209088
Vallortigara G, Cailotto M, Zanforlin M (1990) Sex differences in social reinstatement motivation of the domestic chick (Gallus gallus) revealed by runway tests with social and nonsocial reinforcement. J Comp Psychol 104:361–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.104.4.361
Vallortigara G, Regolin L, Marconato F (2005) Visually inexperienced chicks exhibit spontaneous preference for biological motion patterns. PLoS Biol 3:e208. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030208
Versace E, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2006) Emergence of grammar as revealed by visual imprinting in newly-hatched chicks. In: Cangelosi A, Smith ADM, Smith K (eds) The evolution of language. Proceedings of the 6th international conference, Rome. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 457-458
Versace E, Schill J, Nencini AM, Vallortigara G (2016) Naïve chicks prefer hollow objects. PLoS ONE 11:e0166425. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166425
Versace E, Fracasso I, Baldan G, Dalle Zotte A, Vallortigara G (2017a) Newborn chicks show inherited variability in early social predispositions for hen-like stimuli. Sci Rep 7:40296. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep40296
Versace E, Spierings MJ, Caffini M, ten Cate C, Vallortigara G (2017b) Spontaneous generalization of abstract multimodal patterns in young domestic chicks. Anim Cogn 20:521–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1079-5
Versace E, Ragusa M, Vallortigara G (2019) A transient time window for early predispositions in newborn chicks. Sci Rep 9:18767. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-55255-y
Whiteside MA, van Horik JO, Langley EJ, Beardsworth CE, Laker PR, Madden JR (2017) Differences in social preference between the sexes during ontogeny drive segregation in a precocial species. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 71:103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-017-2332-2
Whiteside MA, van Horik JO, Langley EJ, Beardsworth CE, Madden JR (2018) Size dimorphism and sexual segregation in pheasants: tests of three competing hypotheses. PeerJ 6:e5674. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.5674
Whiteside MA, van Horik JO, Langley EJ, Beardsworth CE, Capstick LA, Madden JR (2019) Patterns of association at feeder stations for Common Pheasants released into the wild: sexual segregation by space and time. Ibis 161:325–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/ibi.12632
Worsley A (1974) Long-term effects of imprinting exposure upon breed discriminatory behaviour in chickens: I. Imprinting to peers (“peerprinting”). Z Tierpsychol 35:1–9
Acknowledgments
We thank Giulia Iacovelli for the help in data collection. We are also grateful to the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable feedback on previous versions of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
All experiments comply with the ASAB/ABS Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Research and with the current Italian and European Community laws for the ethical treatment of animals and the experimental procedures were approved by the Ethical Committee of the University of Trento and licensed by the Italian Health Ministry (permit number 630-2018 PR).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Communicated by B. Voelkl
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pallante, V., Rucco, D. & Versace, E. Young chicks quickly lose their spontaneous preference to aggregate with females. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 75, 78 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-021-03012-5
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-021-03012-5