Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 69, Issue 4, pp 635–643 | Cite as

Problem-solving ability and response to novelty in mountain chickadees (Poecile gambeli) from different elevations

  • Dovid Y. Kozlovsky
  • Carrie L. Branch
  • Vladimir V. Pravosudov
Original Paper


Animals inhabiting challenging and harsh environments are expected to benefit from certain phenotypic traits including cognitive abilities. In particular, innovation and habituation are traits thought to benefit animals in challenging environments and increase individual’s probability of survival via increased foraging success. Here, we tested whether mountain chickadees from two elevations varying in winter climate severity differed in two traits involving innovation and habituation–problem-solving ability and response to novelty. Higher montane elevations are associated with a significantly longer winter period characterized by lower temperatures and more snow, making winter survival more challenging due to a probable increase in foraging demands. Mountain chickadees inhabiting the harsher high elevation were significantly faster at solving a novel problem than their low elevation counterparts. Birds from both elevations responded with increased latency to approach the novel object; however, there were no elevation-related differences. Male and female chickadees responded similarly on both tasks, suggesting no sex-related differences in problem solving ability or neophobia. The problem solving results are consistent with the results for closely related black-capped chickadees along a longitudinal gradient of winter climatic harshness on a larger geographic scale, but the response to novelty data is not. Overall, our data support the hypothesis that enhanced problem solving ability might be associated with living in harsher environments either via natural selection or by plastic response to different environments and suggest that differences in problem solving ability do not have to be associated with differences in neophobia.


Problem solving Neophobia Innovation Novelty Environmental harshness Chickadee 



We would like to acknowledge Elena Pravosudova for help capturing birds and Shelby Brown, Frank Gonzalez, Kallie Kappes, and Emily Weissgerber for help with bird care and maintenance and University of Nevada, Reno’s EECB doctoral program for research funds. All authors were supported by NSF (IOS-1351295) to VVP.

Ethical standards

All experiments reported here comply with the current laws of the United States of America. Chickadees were collected under Federal (MB022532) and California (5210) scientific collecting permits. All animal procedures were in accordance with the University of Nevada Reno Animal Care and Use Protocol (00576).


  1. Aplin LM, Sheldon BC, Morand-Ferron J (2013) Milk bottles revisited: social learning and individual variation in the blue tit, Cyanistes caeruleus. Anim Behav 85:1225–1232Google Scholar
  2. Arnold KE, Ramsay SL, Donaldson C, Adam A (2007) Parental prey selection affects risk-taking behaviour and spatial learning in avian offspring. Proc R Soc Lond B 274:2563–2569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biondi LM, Bo MS, Vassallo AI (2010) Inter-individual and age differences in exploration, neophobia, and problem-solving ability in Neotropical raptor (Milvago chimango). Anim Cogn 13:701–710CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Boogert NJ, Reader SM, Laland KN (2006) The relation between social rank, neophobia, and individual learning in starlings. Anim Behav 72:1229–1239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Branch CL, Kozlovsky DY, Pravosudov VV (2015) Elevation related differences in female mate preference in mountain chickadees: are 'smart' chickadees choosier. Anim Behav 99:89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cauchard L, Boogert NJ, Lefebvre L, Dubois F, Doligez B (2013) Problem-solving performance is correlated with reproductive success in a wild bird population. Anim Behav 85:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chittka L, Niven J (2009) Are bigger brains better? Curr Biol 19:R995–R1008CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Cole EF, Cram DL, Quinn JL (2011) Individual variation in spontaneous problem-solving performance among wild great tits. Anim Behav 81:491–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cole EF, Morand-Ferron J, Hinks AE, Quinn JL (2012) Cognitive ability influences reproductive life history variation in the wild. Curr Biol 22:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deaner RO, Isler K, Burkart J, van Schaik C (2007) Overall brain size, and not ecephalization quotient, best predicts cognitive ability across non-human primates. Brain Behav Evol 70:115–124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dukas R (1998) Evolutionary ecology of learning. In: Dukas R (ed) Cognitive ecology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 129–174Google Scholar
  12. Ensminger AL, Westneat DF (2012) Individual and sex differences in habituation and neophobia in house sparrows (Passer domesticus). Ethology 118:1085–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feenders G, Klaus K, Bateson M (2011) Fear and exploration in European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris): a comparison of hand-reared and wild-caught birds. PLoS One 6:e19074CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fox RA, LaDage LD, Roth TC II, Pravosudov VV (2009) Behavioral profile predicts dominance status in mountain chickadees. Anim Behav 77:1441–1448CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Freas CA, LaDage LD, Roth TC II, Pravosudov VV (2012) Elevation-related differences in memory and the hippocampus in mountain chickadees (Poecile gambeli). Anim Behav 84:121–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Freas CA, Bingman K, LaDage LD, Pravosudov VV (2013) Untangling elevation-related differences in the hippocampus in food-caching mountain chickadees: the effect of a uniform captive environment. Brain Behav Evol 82:199–209CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Greenberg R (2003) The role of neophobia and neophilia in the development of innovative behaviour of birds. In: Reader SM, Laland KN (eds) Animal innovation, Oxford University Press, pp 175–196Google Scholar
  18. Griffin AS, Guez D (2014) Innovation and problem solving: a review of common mechanisms. Behav Process 109:121–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Healy SD, Rowe C (2007) A critique of comparative studies of brain size. Proc R Soc Lond B 274:453–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones RB (1986) Responses of domestic chicks to novel food as a function of sex, strain and previous experience. Behav Process 12:261–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kozlovsky DY, Branch CL, Freas CA, Pravosudov VV (2014a) Elevation-related differences in novel environment exploration and social dominance in food-caching mountain chickadees. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:1871–1881CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kozlovsky DY, Brown SL, Branch CL, Roth TC II, Pravosudov VV (2014b) Chickadees with bigger brains have smaller digestive tract: a multi-population comparison. Brain Behav Evol 84:172–180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kozlovsky DY, Branch Cl, Pravosudov VV (2015) Elevation related differences in parental risk taking behavior are associated with cognitive variation in mountain chickadees. Ethology In PressGoogle Scholar
  24. Krebs JR, Sherry DF, Healy SD, Perry H, Vaccarino AL (1989) Hippocampal specialization of food-storing birds. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 86:1388–1392CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Laland KN, Reader SM (1999) Foraging innovation in the guppy. Anim Behav 57:331–340CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Marples NM, Roper TJ, Harper DGC (1998) Responses of wild birds to novel prey: evidence of dietary conservatism. Oikos 83:161–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morand-Ferron J, Cole EF, Rawles JEC, Quinn JL (2011) Who are the innovators? A field experiment with two passerine species. Behav Ecol 22:1241–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pravosudov VV, Roth TC II (2013) Cognitive ecology of food hoarding: the evolution of spatial memory and the hippocampus. Annu Rev Ecol Evol S 44:173–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Reader SM, Laland KN (2001) Primate innovatin: sex, age and social rank differences. Int J Primatol 22:787–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Reader SM, Laland KN (2002) Social intelligence, innovation, and enhanced brain size in primates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:4436–4441CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Reader SM, Hager Y, Laland KN (2011) The evolution of primate general and cultural intelligence. Philos T Roy Soc B 366:1017–1027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roth TC II, Pravosudov VV (2009) Hippocampal volume and neuron numbers increase along a gradient of environmental harshness: a large-scale comparison. Proc R Soc Lond B 276:401–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Roth TC II, LaDage LD, Pravosudov VV (2010) Learning capabilities enhanced in harsh environments: a common garden approach. Proc R Soc Lond B 277:3187–3193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roth TC II, LaDage LD, Pravosudov VV (2011) Variation in hippocampal morphology along an environmental gradient: controlling for the effect of day length. Proc R Soc Lond B 278:2662–2667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rowe C, Healy SD (2014) Measuring variation in cognition. Behav Ecol 25:1287–1292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sherry DF, Jacobs LF, Gaulin SJ (1992) Spatial memory and adaptive specialization of the hippocampus. Trends Neurosci 15:298–303CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Shettleworth SJ (1998) Cognition, evolution, and behaviour. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  38. Shettleworth SJ (2009) The evolution of comparative cognition: is the snark a boojum? Behav Process 80:210–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sih A, Bell AM, Johnson JC, Ziemba RE (2004) Behavioral syndromes: an integrative overview. Q Rev Biol 79:241–277CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Sol D, Duncan RP, Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Lefebvre L (2005) Big brains, enhanced cognition, and response of birds to novel environments. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102:5460–5465CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sol D, Bacher S, Reader SM, Lefebvre L (2008) Brain size predicts the success of mammal species introduced into novel environments. Am Nat 172:S63–S71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Thornton A, Samson J (2012) Innovative problem solving in wild meerkats. Anim Behav 83:1459–1468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thornton A, Isden J, Madden JR (2014) Toward wild psychometrics: linking individual cognitive differences to fitness. Behav Ecol. doi: 10.1093/beheco/aru095 Google Scholar
  44. Webster SJ, Lefebvre L (2001) Problem solving and neophobia in a columbiform-passeriform assemblage in Barbados. Anim Behav 62:23–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wright TF, Eberhard JR, Hobson EA, Avery ML, Russello MA (2010) Behavioral flexibility and species invasions: the adaptive flexibility hypothesis. Ethol Ecol Evol 22:393–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dovid Y. Kozlovsky
    • 1
  • Carrie L. Branch
    • 1
  • Vladimir V. Pravosudov
    • 1
  1. 1.Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology Graduate Program, Department of BiologyUniversity of Nevada, RenoRenoUSA

Personalised recommendations