Hemispheric differences in the recognition of partly occluded objects by newly hatched domestic chicks (Gallus gallus)
- 134 Downloads
- 21 Citations
Abstract
Domestic chicks are capable of perceiving as a whole objects partly concealed by occluders (“amodal completion”). In previous studies chicks were imprinted on a certain configuration and at test they were required to choose between two alternative versions of it. Using the same paradigm we now investigated the presence of hemispheric differences in amodal completion by testing newborn chicks with one eye temporarily patched. Separate groups of newly hatched chicks were imprinted binocularly: (1) on a square partly occluded by a superimposed bar, (2) on a whole or (3) on an amputated version of the square. At test, in monocular conditions, each chick was presented with a free choice between a complete and an amputated square. In the crucial condition 1, chicks tested with only their left eye in use chose the complete square (like binocular chicks would do); right-eyed chicks, in contrast, tended to choose the amputated square. Similar results were obtained in another group of chicks imprinted binocularly onto a cross (either occluded or amputated in its central part) and required to choose between a complete or an amputated cross. Left-eyed and binocular chicks chose the complete cross, whereas right-eyed chicks did not choose the amputated cross significantly more often. These findings suggest that neural structures fed by the left eye (mainly located in the right hemisphere) are, in the chick, more inclined to a “global” analysis of visual scenes, whereas those fed by the right eye seem to be more inclined to a “featural” analysis of visual scenes.
Keywords
Lateralisation Hemispheric difference Amodal completion Domestic chickNotes
Acknowledgements
The experiments comply with the current Italian and European Community laws for the ethical treatment of animals.
References
- Andrew RJ (1991) The chick in experiment: techniques and tests. General. In: Andrew RJ (ed) Neural and behavioural plasticity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 6–11Google Scholar
- Cerella J (1980) The pigeon’s analysis of pictures. Pattern Recogn 12:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Corballis PM, Fendrich R, Shapley RM, Gazzaniga M (1999) Illusory contour perception and amodal boundary completion: evidence of a dissociation following callosotomy. J Cogn Neurosci 11:459–466CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Deng C, Rogers LJ (1997) Differential contributions of the two visual pathways to functional lateralization in chicks. Behav Brain Res 87:173–182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Deng C, Rogers LJ (1998a) Organisation of the tectorotundal and SP/IPS-rotundal projections in the chick. J Comp Neurol 394:171–185CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Deng C, Rogers LJ (1998b) Bilaterally projecting neurons in the two visual pathways of chicks. Brain Res 794:281–290CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Deng C, Rogers LJ (2002a) Social recognition and approach in the chick: lateralization and effect of visual experience. Anim Behav 63:697–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Deng C, Rogers LJ (2002b) Factors affecting the development of lateralization in chicks. In: Rogers LJ, Andrew RJ (eds) Comparative vertebrate lateralization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 206–246Google Scholar
- Deruelle C, Barbet I, Dépy D, Fagot J (2000) Perception of partly occluded figures by baboons (Papio papio). Perception 39:1483–1497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dharmaretnam M, Andrew RJ (1994) Age- and stimulus-specific effects on the use of right and left eyes by the domestic chick. Anim Behav 48:1395–1406Google Scholar
- Di Pietro NT, Wasserman EA, Young ME (2002) Effects of occlusion on pigeon’s visual object recognition. Perception 31:1299–1312CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Forkman B (1998) Hens use occlusion to judge depth in a two-dimensional picture. Perception 27:861–867PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Forkman B, Vallortigara G (1999) Minimization of modal contours: an essential cross-species strategy in disambiguating relative depth. Anim Cogn 2:181–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fujita K (2001) Perceptual completion in rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta) and pigeons (Columba livia). Percept Psychophys 63:115–125PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Funk MS (1996) Development of object permanence in the New Zealand parakeet (Cyanoramphus auriceps). Anim Learn Behav 24:375–383Google Scholar
- Gross Y, Franko I, Lewin L (1978) Effects of voluntary eye movements on hemispheric activity and choice of cognitive mode. Neuropsychologia 17:653–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Grossberg S, Mingolla E (1985) Neural dynamics of form perception: boundary completion, illusory figures, and neon colour spreading. Psychol Rev 92:173–211PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Güntürkün O (1997) Avian visual lateralization: a review. Neuroreport 8:3–11Google Scholar
- Güntürkün O, Hahmann U (1999) Functional subdivisions of the ascending visual pathways in the pigeon. Behav Brain Res 98:193–201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hellmann B, Güntürkün O (1999) Visual field specific heterogeneity within the tectofugal projection of the pigeon. Eur J Neurosci 11:1–18CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hodos W, Macko KA, Bessette BB (1984) Near-field acuity changes after visual system lesions in pigeons. II. Telencephalon. Behav Brain Res 13:15–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kanizsa G (1979) Organization in vision. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Kanizsa G, Renzi P, Conte S, Compostela C, Guerani L (1993) Amodal completion in mouse vision. Perception 22:713–721PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lea SEG, Slater AM, Ryan CME (1996) Perception of object unity in chicks: a comparison with human infant. Infant Behav Dev 19:501–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Michotte A (1963) The perception of causality. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Michotte A, Thinés G, Crabbé G (1964) Les complements amodaux des structures perceptives. Publications Universitaires de Louvain, LouvainGoogle Scholar
- Osada Y, Schiller PH (1994) Can monkeys see objects under condition of transparency and occlusion? Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 35:1664Google Scholar
- Pepperberg IM, Funk MS (1990) Object permanence in four species of psittacine birds: an African Grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus), an Illiger mini macaw (Ara maracana), a parakeet (Melopsittacus undulatus), and a cockatiel (Nymphicus hollandicus). Anim Learn Behav 18:97–108Google Scholar
- Plowright CMS, Reid S, Kilian T (1998) Finding hidden food: behavior on visible displacement tasks by mynahs (Gracula religiosa) and pigeons (Columba livia). J Comp Psychol 112:13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pollok B, Prior H, Güntürkün O (2000) Development of object permanence in food-storing magpies (Pica pica). J Comp Psychol 114:148–157CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Prior H, Güntürkün O (1999) Patterns of visual lateralization in pigeons: seeing what is there and beyond. Perception Suppl 28:22Google Scholar
- Rashid N, Andrew RJ (1989) Right hemisphere advantages for topographical orientation in the domestic chick. Neuropsychologia 27:937–948CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Regolin L, Vallortigara G (1995) Perception of partly occluded objects by young chicks. Percept Psychophys 57:971–976Google Scholar
- Rogers LJ (1980) Lateralization in the avian brain. Bird Behav 2:1–12Google Scholar
- Rogers LJ (1995) The development of brain and behaviour in the chicken. CAB International, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
- Rogers LJ (1996) Behavioral, structural and neurochemical asymmetries in the avian brain: a model system for studying visual development and processing. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 20:487–503CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rogers LJ (2002) Advantages and disadvantages of lateralization. In: Rogers LJ Andrew RJ (eds) Comparative vertebrate lateralization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 126–153Google Scholar
- Rogers LJ, Deng C (1999) Light experience and lateralization of the two visual pathways in the chick. Behav Brain Res 98:277–287CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sato A, Kanazawa S, Fujita K (1997) Perception of objects unity in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Jpn Psychol Res 39:191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sekuler AB, Lee JAJ, Shettleworth SJ (1996) Pigeons do not complete partly occluded figures. Perception 25:1109–1120PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shipley TF, Kellman PJ (1992) Strength of visual interpolation depends on the ratio of physically specified to total edge length. Percept Psychophys 52:97–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tommasi L, Vallortigara G (2001) Encoding of geometric and landmark information in the left and right hemispheres of the avian brain. Behav Neurosci 115:602–613CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tommasi L, Andrew RJ, Vallortigara G (2000) Eye use in search is determined by the nature of the task in the domestic chick. Behav Brain Res 112:119–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vallortigara G (1992) Right hemisphere advantage for social recognition in the chick. Neuropsychologia 30:761–768CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vallortigara G (2000) Comparative neuropsychology of the dual brain: a stroll through left and right animals’ perceptual worlds. Brain Lang 73:189–219CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vallortigara G (2004) Comparative vertebrate cognition: are primates superior to non-primates. In: Rogers LJ, Kaplan G (eds) Vertebrate comparative cognition: are primates special? Plenum, New York, (in press)Google Scholar
- Vallortigara G, Andrew RJ (1991) Lateralization of response by chicks to change a model partner. Anim Behav 41:187–194Google Scholar
- Vallortigara G, Andrew RJ (1994) Differential involvement of right and left hemisphere in individual recognition in the domestic chick. Behav Process 33:41–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vallortigara G, Regolin L, Bortolomiol G, Tommasi L (1996) Lateral asymmetries due to preference in eye use during visual discrimination learning in chicks. Behav Brain Res 74:135–143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vallortigara G, Rogers LJ, Bisazza A (1999) Possible evolutionary origins of cognitive brain lateralization. Brain Res Rev 30:164–175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vallortigara G, Cozzutti C, Tommasi L, Rogers LJ (2001) How birds use their eyes: opposite left-right specialisation for the lateral and frontal visual hemifield in the domestic chick. Curr Biol 11:29–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Watanabe S, Ito Y (1991) Discrimination of individuals in pigeons. Bird Behav 9:20–29Google Scholar