Precise relative-quantity judgement in the striped field mouse Apodemus agrarius Pallas
Applying the classical experimental scheme of training animals with food rewards to discriminate between quantities of visual stimuli, we demonstrated that not only can striped field mice Apodemus agrarius discriminate between clearly distinctive quantities such as 5 and 10, but some of these mice also exhibit high accuracy in discriminating between quantities that differ only by one. The latter include both small (such as 2 versus 3) and relatively large (such as 5 versus 6, and 8 versus 9) quantities of elements. This is the first evidence of precise relative-quantity judgement in wild rodents. We found striking individual variation in cognitive performance among striped field mice, which possibly reflects individual cognitive variation in natural populations. We speculate that high accuracy in differentiating large quantities is based on the adaptive ability of wild rodents to capture subtle changes in their environment. We suggest that the striped field mouse may be a powerful model species to develop advanced cognitive tests for comparative studies of numerical competence in animals and for understanding evolutionary roots of quantity processing.
KeywordsNumerical competence Relative-quantity judgement Training Two-choice discrimination Visual stimuli Rodents Behavioural flexibility Individual cognitive variation
We are grateful to Daniil Ryabko for the helpful discussion and useful comments. We thank Veronika Aculich for the help in conducting experiments. We appreciate the efforts and valuable comments of two anonymous reviewers that helped us to improve the manuscript.
The study was funded by Russian Fund for Basic Research (No. 17-04-00702) and by The Federal Fundamental Scientific Research Program for 2013–2020 No. VI.51.1.10. (АААА-А16-116121410120-0) (Grant no. 0-109-2018-0074).
Supplementary Video 1. The choice of visual stimuli during the exam phase, that is, when neither of the boxes contains food. Here, the animal made its choice still being inside the cup (AVI 2083 KB)
Supplementary Video 2. The choice of visual stimuli during the exam phase, that is, when neither of the boxes contains food. Here, the animal made its choice while running around the arena (AVI 2670 KB)
- Anderson US, Stoinski TS, Bloomsmith MA, Maple TL (2007) Relative numerousness judgment and summation in young, middle-aged, and older adult orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus abelii and Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus). J Comp Physiol 121(1):1–11Google Scholar
- Beran MJ, Perdue BM, Evans TA (2015) Monkey mathematical abilities. In: Kadosh RC, Dowker A (eds) The Oxford handbook of numerical cognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 237–257Google Scholar
- Beran MJ, Menzel CR, Parrish AE, Perdue BM, Sayers K, Smith JD, Washburn DA (2016) Primate cognition: attention, episodic memory, prospective memory, self-control, and metacognition as examples of cognitive control in nonhuman primates. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci 7(5):294–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1397 PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Boysen ST, Berntson GG (1989) Numerical competence in a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol 103(1):23Google Scholar
- Brannon EM, Merritt DJ (2011) Evolutionary foundations of the approximate number system. In: Dehaene S, Brannon E (eds) Space, time and number in the brain: searching for the foundations of mathematical thought. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 207–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-385948-8.00014-1 Google Scholar
- Burns RA, Goettl ME, Burt ST (1995) Numerical discrimination with arrhythmic serial presentations. Psychol Rec 45(1):95–104Google Scholar
- Call J (2000) Estimating and operating on discrete quantities in orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus). J Comp Psychol 114(2):136Google Scholar
- Chelkowska H, Walkowa W, Adamcszyk K (1985) Spatial relationship in sympatric population of the rodents: Clethrionomys glareolus, Microtus agrestis and Apodemus agrarius. Acta Ther 30(2):51–78Google Scholar
- Dehaene S (2011) The number sense: how the mind creates mathematics. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Fernandes DM, Church RM (1982) Discrimination of the number of sequential events by rats. Anim Learn Behav 10(2):171–176Google Scholar
- Mazokhin-Porshnyakov GA, Kartsev VM (2000) Learning in bees and wasps in complicated experimental tasks. In: Cruse H, Dean J, Ritter H (eds) The cognitive development of an autonomous behaving operational intelligence: adaptive behavior and intelligent systems without symbols and logic. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 908–926. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0870-9_56 Google Scholar
- Reznikova Z (2018) Ants. Individual and social cognition. In: Bueno-Guerra N, Amici F (eds) Field and laboratory methods in animal cognition: a comparative guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 8–30Google Scholar
- Reznikova Z, Ryabko B (1994) Experimental study of the ants’ communication system with the application of the Information Theory approach. Mem Zool 48:219–236Google Scholar
- Reznikova Z, Ryabko B (2001) A study of ants’ numerical competence. Comput Inf Sci 6(15):111–126Google Scholar
- Shenger-Krestovnikova NR (1921) On the differentiation of visual stimuli and on the limits of differentiation in the visual analyzer of a dog. Bull Lesgaft Inst Petrograd 3:1–43Google Scholar