How fish do geometry in large and in small spaces
- 242 Downloads
It has been shown that children and non-human animals seem to integrate geometric and featural information to different extents in order to reorient themselves in environments of different spatial scales. We trained fish (redtail splitfins, Xenotoca eiseni) to reorient to find a corner in a rectangular tank with a distinctive featural cue (a blue wall). Then we tested fish after displacement of the feature on another adjacent wall. In the large enclosure, fish chose the two corners with the feature, and also tended to choose among them the one that maintained the correct arrangement of the featural cue with respect to geometric sense (i.e. left-right position). In contrast, in the small enclosure, fish chose both the two corners with the features and the corner, without any feature, that maintained the correct metric arrangement of the walls with respect to geometric sense. Possible reasons for species differences in the use of geometric and non-geometric information are discussed.
KeywordsGeometric module Spatial orientation Modularity Fish Chick Children
We thank Rosa Damiani for help with training of the animals. G.V was supported by grants MIUR Cofin 2004, 2004070353_002 “Intel-lat” and MIPAF “Ben-o-lat”.
- Cheng K, Newcombe NS (2005) Is there a geometric module for spatial orientation? Squaring theory and evidence. Psychon Bull Rev 12:1–23Google Scholar
- Meyer MK, Wischnath L, Foerster W (1985) Lebendgeba¨rende Zierfishe: Arten der Welt. Mergus Verlag, MelleGoogle Scholar
- Nadel L, Hupbach A (2006) Cross-species comparisons in development: the case of the spatial “module”. In: Johnson MH, Munakata Y (eds) Attention and Performance XXI. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 499–511Google Scholar
- Sovrano VA, Vallortigara G (2006) Dissecting the geometric module: a sense-linkage for metric and landmark information in animals’ spatial reorientation. Psych Sci 17Google Scholar
- Spelke ES (2003) What makes us smart. Core knowledge and natural language. In: Gentner D, Goldin-Meadow S (eds) Language in mind. Advances in the study of language and thought. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 277–311Google Scholar
- Spelke ES, Tsivkin S (2001) Initial knowledge and conceptual change: space and number. In: Bowerman M, Levinson S (eds) Language acquisition and conceptual development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
- Vallortigara G (2004) Visual cognition and representation in birds and primates. In: Rogers LJ, Kaplan G (eds) Vertebrate comparative cognition: are primates superior to non-primates? Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, Boston, New York, pp 57–94Google Scholar
- Vallortigara G (2006) The cognitive chicken: visual and spatial cognition in a non-mammalian brain. In: Wasserman EA, Zentall TR (eds) comparative cognition: experimental explorations of animal intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp 41–58Google Scholar