Advertisement

Animal Cognition

, Volume 17, Issue 5, pp 1157–1165 | Cite as

Wild hummingbirds rely on landmarks not geometry when learning an array of flowers

  • T. Andrew Hurly
  • Thomas A. O. Fox
  • Danielle M. Zwueste
  • Susan D. Healy
Original Paper

Abstract

Rats, birds or fish trained to find a reward in one corner of a small enclosure tend to learn the location of the reward using both nearby visual features and the geometric relationships of corners and walls. Because these studies are conducted under laboratory and thereby unnatural conditions, we sought to determine whether wild, free-living rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus) learning a single reward location within a rectangular array of flowers would similarly employ both nearby visual landmarks and the geometric relationships of the array. Once subjects had learned the location of the reward, we used test probes in which one or two experimental landmarks were moved or removed in order to reveal how the birds remembered the reward location. The hummingbirds showed no evidence that they used the geometry of the rectangular array of flowers to remember the reward. Rather, they used our experimental landmarks, and possibly nearby, natural landmarks, to orient and navigate to the reward. We believe this to be the first test of the use of rectangular geometry by wild animals, and we recommend further studies be conducted in ecologically relevant conditions in order to help determine how and when animals form complex geometric representations of their local environments.

Keywords

Hummingbird Orientation Navigation Spatial memory Landmark Geometry 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Mark Hornsby, Ken Cheng and two anonymous reviewers for valuable discussion or helpful comments on the manuscript. Logistical support was provided by the University of Lethbridge and financial support by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (TAH, TAOF, DMZ) and the Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour (SDH).

Conflict of interest

None of the authors have conflicting financial relationships with any of the funding or approval agencies associated with the research reported here.

Ethical standard

This research was conducted with the approval of the University of Lethbridge Animal Welfare Committee, meeting the standards of the Canadian Council on Animal Care, and under permits from the Canadian Wildlife Service and Alberta Sustainable Resource Development.

References

  1. Batty ER, Bloomfield LL, Spetch ML, Sturdy CB (2009) Comparing black-capped (Poecile atricapillus) and mountain chickadees (Poecile gambeli): use of geometric and featural information in a spatial orientation task. Anim Cognit 12:633–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown AA, Spetch ML, Hurd PL (2007) Growing in circles: rearing environment alters spatial navigation in fish. Psychol Sci 18:569–573PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng K (1986) A purely geometric module in the rat’s spatial representation. Cognition 23:149–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheng K, Sherry DF (1992) Landmark-based spatial memory in birds (Parus atricapillus and Columba liva): the use of edges and distances to represent spatial positions. J Comp Psychol 106:331–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng K, Huttenlocher J, Newcombe NS (2013) 25 years of research on the use of geometry in spatial reorientation: a current theoretical perspective. Psychon Bull Rev 20:1033–1054PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiandetti C, Vallortigara G (2008) Is there an innate geometric module? Effects of experience with angular geometric cues on spatial re-orientation based on the shape of the environment. Anim Cognit 11:139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Collett M (2012) How navigational guidance systems are combined in a desert ant. Curr Biol 22:927–932PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Flores-Abreau IN, Hurly TA, Healy SD (2012) One-trial spatial learning: wild hummingbirds relocate a rewarding location after a single visit. Anim Cognit 15:631–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Freire R, Munro U, Rogers LJ, Wiltschko R, Wiltschko W (2005) Chickens orient using the magnetic compass. Curr Biol 15:R620–R621PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fuxjager MJ, Eastwood BS, Lohmann KJ (2011) Orientation of hatchling loggerhead sea turtles to regional magnetic fields along a transoceanic migratory pathway. J Exp Biol 214:2504–2508PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gibson BM, Wilks TJ, Kelly DM (2007) Rats (Rattus norvegicus) encode the shape of an array of discrete objects. J Comp Psychol 121:130–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gray ER, Spetch ML, Kelly DM, Nguyen A (2004) Searching in the center: pigeons (Columba livia) encode relative distance from walls of an enclosure. J Comp Psychol 118:113–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gray ER, Bloomfield LL, Ferrey A, Spetch ML, Sturdy CB (2005) Spatial encoding in mountain chickadees: features overshadow geometry. Biol Lett 1:314–317PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guilford T, Akesson S, Gagliardo A, Holland RA, Mouritsen H, Muheim R, Wiltschko R, Wiltschko W, Bingman VP (2011) Migratory navigation in birds: new opportunities in an era of fast-developing tracking technology. J Exp Biol 214:3705–3712PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Healy SD, Hurly TA (1998) Rufous hummingbirds’ (Selasphorus rufus) memory for flowers: patterns or actual spatial locations? J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 24:396–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Healy SD, Hurly TA (2013) What hummingbirds can tell us about cognition in the wild. Comp Cognit Behav Rev 8:13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hurly TA, Healy SD (1996) Memory for flowers in rufous hummingbirds: location or local visual cues? Anim Behav 51:1149–1157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hurly TA, Healy SD (2002) Cue use by rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 28:209–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hurly TA, Scott RD, Healy SD (2001) The function of displays of male rufous hummingbirds. Condor 103:647–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hurly TA, Franz S, Healy SD (2010) Do rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus) use visual beacons? Anim Cognit 13:377–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kamil AC, Balda RP, Good S (1999) Patterns of movement and orientation during caching and recovery by Clark’s nutcrackers, Nucrifraga columbiana. Anim Behav 57:1327–1335PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kelly DM (2010) Features enhance encoding of geometry. Anim Cognit 13:453–462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kelly DM, Spetch ML (2001) Pigeons encode relative geometry. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 27:417–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kelly DM, Spetch ML, Heth CD (1998) Pigeons’ encoding of geometric and featural properties of a spatial environment. J Comp Psychol 112:259–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Krebs JR, Healy SD, Shettleworth SA (1990) Spatial memory of Paridae: comparison of a storing and a non-storing species, the coal tit, Parus ater, and the great tit, P major. Anim Behav 39:1127–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lee SA, Spelke ES, Vallortigara G (2012a) Chicks, like children, spontaneously reorient by three-dimensional environmental geometry, not by image matching. Biol Lett 8:492–494PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee SA, Vallortigara G, Ruga V, Sovrano VA (2012b) Independent effects of geometry and landmark in a spontaneous reorientation task: a study of two species of fish. Anim Cognit 15:861–870CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lee SA, Vallortigara G, Flore M, Spelke ES, Sovrano VA (2013) Navigation by environmental geometry: the use of zebrafish as a model. J Exp Biol 216:3693–3699PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Margules G, Gallistel CR (1988) Heading in the rat: determination by environmental shape. Anim Learn Behav 16:404–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miller RS, Tamm S, Sutherland GD, Gass CL (1985) Cues for orientation in hummingbird foraging: color and position. Can J Zool 63:18–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nardi D, Nitsch KP, Bingman VP (2010) Slope-driven goal location behavior in pigeons. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 36:430–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ohashi K, Thomson JD, D’Souza D (2007) Trapline foraging by bumble bees: IV. Optimization of route geometry in the absence of competition. Behav Ecol 18:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pecchia T, Vallortigara G (2010) Reorienting strategies in a rectangular array of landmarks by domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). J Comp Psychol 124:147–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pecchia T, Vallortigara G (2012) Spatial reorientation by geometry with freestanding objects and extended surfaces: a unifying view. Proc R Soc B 279:2228–2236PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1995) Biometry, 3rd edn. WH Freedman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Sovrano VA, Bisazza A, Vallortigara G (2005) Animals’ use of landmarks and metric information to reorient: effects of the size of the experimental space. Cognition 97:121–133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sutton JE (2009) What is geometric information and how do animals use it? Behav Proc 80:339–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tommasi L, Chiandetti C, Pecchia T, Sovrano VA, Vallortigara G (2012) From Natural geometry to spatial cognition. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 36:799–824PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vargas JP, Quintero E, López JC (2011) Influence of distal and proximal cues in encoding geometric information. Anim Cognit 14:351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vlasak A (2006) Global and local spatial landmarks: their role during foraging by Columbian ground squirrels (Spermophilus columbianus). Anim Cognit 9:71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Waser NM, McRobert JA (1998) Hummingbird foraging at experimental patches of flowers: evidence for weak risk-aversion. J Avian Biol 29:305–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wiltschko W, Balda RP, Jahnel M, Wiltschko R (1999) Sun compass orientation in seed-caching corvids: its role in spatial memory. Anim Cogn 2:215–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wystrach A, Beugnon G, Cheng K (2011) Landmarks or panoramas: what do navigating ants attend to for navigation? Front Zool 8:21PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Andrew Hurly
    • 1
  • Thomas A. O. Fox
    • 1
    • 3
  • Danielle M. Zwueste
    • 1
    • 4
  • Susan D. Healy
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of LethbridgeLethbridgeCanada
  2. 2.School of BiologyUniversity of St. AndrewsFifeUK
  3. 3.Department of GeographyMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  4. 4.Veterinary Medical Teaching HospitalUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations