Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The use of spatial and local cues for orientation in domestic chicks (Gallus gallus)

Abstract

Birds have been widely used to study spatial orientation. However, since different birds rely on different types of visual information to find goal locations (such as spatial information from free-standing objects or local cues, i.e. characteristics of a goal location like color and shape), it is important to investigate this aspect in each model species. The aim of the present study was to clarify whether domestic chicks, a ground-living bird and a widely used model for the comparative study of spatial orientation, are able to reorient in relation to free-standing objects and if they preferentially follow local or spatial cues. Furthermore, we also investigated whether monocular eye occlusion influences the ability of chicks to use spatial or local cues. Chicks were trained and tested in a large circular arena with free-standing objects providing relational spatial information, to find food in one of the feeders. We found that dark-incubated male chicks were able to reorient in relation to distinct, free-standing landmarks (Experiment 1), but when local and spatial cues were put in conflict, chicks significantly preferred local cues over spatial cues (Experiment 3). Moreover, while the use of one eye system only was not sufficient to orient by spatial cues (Experiment 2), the preference for local over spatial cues was independent of monocular occlusion (Experiment 4). The results are discussed in relation to our general knowledge of spatial information processing in domestic chicks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Andrew RJ, Dharmaretnam M (1993) Lateralisation and strategies of viewing in the domestic chicks. In: Zeiger HP, Bischof HJ (eds) Vision, brain and behavior in birds, chapter 18. MIT Press, Cambridge, p 322

  2. Andrew RJ, Johnston ANB, Robins A, Rogers LJ (2004) Light experience and the development of behavioural lateralisation in chicks: II. Choice of familiar versus unfamiliar model social partner. Behav Brain Res 155:67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2004.04.016

  3. Bennett ATD (1993) Spatial memory in a food storing corvid—I. Near tall landmarks are primarily used. J Comp Physiol A 173:193–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00192978

  4. Bingman VP (2018) Requiem for a heavyweight—can anything more be learned from homing pigeons about the sensory and spatial-representational basis of avian navigation? J Exp Biol 221(20):jeb163089. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.163089

  5. Brodbeck DR (1994) Memory for spatial and local cues: a comparison of a storing and a nonstoring species. Anim Learn Behav 22:119–133. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199912

  6. Brodbeck DR, Shettleworth SJ (1995) Matching location and color of a compound stimulus: comparison of a food-storing and a nonstoring bird species. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 21:64–77. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.21.1.64

  7. Cartwright BA, Collett TS (1983) Landmark learning in bees. J Comp Physiol 151:521–543

  8. Cheng K (1986) A purely geometric module in the rat’s spatial representation. Cognition 23:149–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(86)90041-7

  9. Cheng K (1988) Some psychophysics of the pigeon’s use of landmarks. J Comp 162(6):815–826

  10. Cheng K (1989) The vector sum model of pigeon landmark use. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Proc 15:366–375

  11. Cheng K (1990) More psychophysics of the pigeon’s use of landmarks. J Comp Physiol A 166:857–863. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00187333

  12. Cheng K, Spetch ML, Kelly DM, Bingman VP (2006) Small-scale spatial cognition in pigeons. Behav Processes 72:115–127

  13. Cheng K, Shettleworth SJ, Huttenlocher J, Rieser JJ (2007) Baysian integration of spatial information. Psychol Bull 133(4):625–637

  14. 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 20:1033–1054

  15. Chiandetti C, Regolin L, Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G (2005) Effects of light stimulation of embryos on the use of position-specific and object-specific cues in binocular and monocular domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Behav Brain Res 163:10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2005.03.024

  16. Chiandetti C, Regolin L, Sovrano VA, Vallortigara G (2007) Spatial reorientation: the effects of space size on the encoding of landmark and geometry information. Anim Cogn 10:159–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-006-0054-3

  17. Chiandetti C, Spelke ES, Vallortigara G (2015) Inexperienced newborn chicks use geometry to spontaneously reorient to an artificial social partner. Dev Sci 18:972–978. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12277

  18. Chiesa AD, Pecchia T, Tommasi L, Vallortigara G (2006) Multiple landmarks, the encoding of environmental geometry and the spatial logics of a dual brain. Anim Cogn 9:281–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-006-0050-7

  19. Clayton NS, Krebs JR (1994a) Memory for spatial and object-specific cues in food-storing and non-storing birds. J Comp Physiol A 174:371–379. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00240218

  20. Clayton NS, Krebs JR (1994b) One-trial associative memory: comparison of food-storing and nonstoring species of birds. Anim Learn Behav 22:366–372

  21. Collett TS (1992) Landmark learning and guidance in insects. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 337:295–303

  22. Collett TS (1995) Making learning easy: the acquisition of visual information during orientation flights of social wasps. J Comp Physiol A 177:737–747

  23. Collett TS, Rees JA (1997) View-based navigation in hymenoptera: multiple strategies of landmark guidance in the approach to a feeder. J Comp Physiol A Sens Neural Behav Physiol 181:47–58

  24. Cowan WM, Adamson L, Powell TPS (1961) An experimental study of the avian visual system. J Anat 95:545–563

  25. Daisley JN, Mascalzoni E, Rosa-Salva O, Rugani R, Regolin L (2009) Lateralization of social cognition in the domestic chicken (Gallus gallus). Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 364(1519):965–981. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0229

  26. Daisley JN, Vallortigara G, Regolin L (2010) Logic in an asymmetrical (social) brain: transitive inference in the young domestic chick. Soc Neurosci 5:309–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470910903529795

  27. Dawkins MS, Woodington A (2000) Pattern recognition and active vision in chickens. Nature 403:652–655

  28. Deng C, Rogers LJ (2002) Social recognition and approach in the chick: lateralization and effect of visual experience. Anim Behav 63:697–706. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2001.1942

  29. Dharmaretnam M, Rogers LJ (2005) Hemispheric specialization and dual processing in strongly versus weakly lateralized chicks. Behav Brain Res 162:62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2005.03.012

  30. Durier V, Graham P, Collett TS (2003) Snapshot memories and landmark guidance in wood ants. Curr Biol 13:1614–1618

  31. Duval A (2019) The representation selection problem: why we should favor the geometric-module framework of spatial reorientation over the view-matching framework. Cognition 192:103985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.05.022

  32. Egevang C, Stenhouse IJ, Phillips RA, Petersen A, Fox JW, Silk JRD (2010) Tracking of arctic terns Sterna paradisaea reveals longest animal migration. Proc Natl Acad Sci 107:2078–2081. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0909493107

  33. Fremouw T, Jackson-Smith P, Kesner RP (1997) Impaired place learning and unimpaired cue learning in hippocampal-lesioned pigeons. Behav Neurosci 111:963–975

  34. Gagliardo A (2013) Forty years of olfactory navigation in birds. J Exp Biol 216:2165–2171. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.070250

  35. Gallistel CR (1990) The organization of learning. The organization of learning, vol 6. The MIT Press, Cambridge, p 121

  36. Graham P, Philippides A, Baddeley B (2010) Animal cognition: multi-modal interactions in ant learning. Curr. Biol. 20:R639–R640

  37. Gray ER, Spetch ML (2006) Pigeons encode absolute distance but relational direction from landmarks and walls. J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 32:474–480

  38. 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 118:113–117

  39. Gray ER, Bloomfield LL, Ferrey A, Spetch ML, Sturdy CB (2005) Spatial encoding in mountain chickadees: features overshadow geometry. Biol Lett 1(3):314–317

  40. Hampton RR, Shettleworth SJ (1996) Hippocampus and memory in a food-storing and in a nonstoring bird species. Behav Neurosci 110:946–964

  41. Healy SE (1995) Memory for objects and positions: delayed non- matching-to-sample in storing and non-storing tits. Q J Exp Psychol B 48:179–191

  42. Healy SD, Krebs JR (1992) Delayed-matching-to-sample by marsh tits and great tits. Q J Exp Psychol B 45:33–47

  43. Herborn K, Alexander L, Arnold KE (2011) Colour cues or spatial cues? Context-dependent preferences in the European greenfinch (Carduelis chloris). Anim Cogn 14:269–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-010-0360-7

  44. Herz RS, Zanette L, Sherry DF (1994) Spatial cues for cache retrieval by black-capped chickadees. Anim Behav 48:343–351

  45. Hodgson ZG, Healy SD (2005) Preference for spatial cues in a non-storing songbird species. Anim Cogn 8:211–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-004-0249-4

  46. Hurly TA, Fox TAO, Zwueste DM, Healy SD (2014) Wild hummingbirds rely on landmarks not geometry when learning an array of flowers. Anim Cogn 17:1157–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-014-0748-x

  47. Johnston ANB, Rogers LJ (1999) Light exposure of chick embryo influences lateralized recall of imprinting memory. Behav Neurosci 113:1267–1273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7044.113.6.1267

  48. Johnston ANB, Bourne RC, Stewart MG, Rogers LJ, Rose SPR (1997) Exposure to light prior to hatching induces asymmetry of receptor binding in specific regions of the chick forebrain. Dev Brain Res 103:83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-3806(97)00125-9

  49. Jouventin P, Weimerskirch H (1990) Satellite tracking of Wandering albatrosses. Nature 343:746–748

  50. Kamil AC, Cheng K (2001) Way-finding and landmarks: the multiple-bearings hypothesis. J Exp Biol 204:103–113

  51. Kelly DM, Spetch ML, Heth CD (1998) Pigeons’ (Columba livia) encoding of geometric and featural properties of a spatial environment. J Comp Psychol 112:259–269

  52. Kelly DM, Kippenbrock S, Templeton J, Kamil AC (2008) Use of a geometric rule or absolute vectors: landmark use by Clark’s nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana). Brain Res Bull 76:293–299

  53. Kelly DM, Kamil AC, Cheng K (2010) Landmark use by Clark’s nutcrackers (Nucifraga columbiana): influence of disorientation and cue rotation on distance and direction estimates. Anim Cogn 13:175–188

  54. Krebs JR (1990) Food storing birds: adaptive specialization in brain and behaviour? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 329:55–62

  55. LaDage LD, Roth TC, Fox R, Pravosudov VV (2009) Flexible cue use in food-caching birds. Anim Cogn 12:419–426

  56. Lee SA, Spelke ES (2011) Young children reorient by computing layout geometry, not by matching images of the environment. Psychon Bull Rev 18:192–198

  57. Lee SA, Spelke ES, Vallortigara G (2012) Chicks, like children, spontaneously reorient by three-dimensional environmental geometry, not by image matching. Biol Lett 8(4):492–494

  58. Legge ELG, Madan CR, Spetch ML, Ludvig EA (2016) Multiple cue use and integration in pigeons (Columba livia). Anim Cogn 19(3):581–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-016-0963-8

  59. Manns M, Ströckens F (2014) Functional and structural comparison of visual lateralization in birds—similar but still different. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00206

  60. Mascetti GG, Vallortigara G (2001) Why do birds sleep with one eye open? Light exposure the chick embryo as a determinant of monocular sleep. Curr Biol 11:971–974

  61. Mayer U, Bischof HJ (2012) Brain activation pattern depends on the strategy chosen by zebra finches to solve an orientation task. J Exp Biol 215:426–434. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.063941

  62. Mayer U, Watanabe S, Bischof HJ (2010) Hippocampal activation of immediate early genes Zenk and c-Fos in zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) during learning and recall of a spatial memory task. Neurobiol Learn Mem 93:322–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2009.11.006

  63. Mayer U, Watanabe S, Bischof HJ (2013) Spatial memory and the avian hippocampus: research in zebra finches. J Physiol Paris Neuroethol 107:2–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphysparis.2012.05.002

  64. Mayer U, Pecchia T, Bingman VP, Flore M, Vallortigara G (2016) Hippocampus and medial striatum dissociation during goal navigation by geometry or features in the domestic chick: an immediate early gene study. Hippocampus 40:27–40

  65. Mayer U, Bhushan R, Vallortigara G, Lee SA (2018) Representation of environmental shape in the hippocampus of domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Brain Struct Funct 223:941–953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-017-1537-5

  66. Moore FR (1987) Sunset and the orientation behaviour of migrating birds. Biol Rev 62:65–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185x.1987.tb00626.x

  67. Mouritsen H (2018) Long-distance navigation and magnetoreception in migratory animals. Nature 558:50–59. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0176-1

  68. Newcombe NS (2007) Taking science seriously: straight thinking about spatial sex differences. In: Why aren’t more women in science?: top researchers debate the evidence. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, pp 69–77. https://doi.org/110.1037/11546-006

  69. Noldus LPJJ, Spink AJ, Tegelenbosch RAJ (2001) EthoVision: a versatile video tracking system for automation of behavioral experiments. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 33(3):398–414. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195394

  70. Ocklenburg S, Gunturkun O (2012) Hemispheric asymmetries: the comparative view. Psychol Front. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00005

  71. Ossenkopp KP, Barbeito R (1978) Bird orientation and the geomagnetic field: a review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2:255–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7634(78)90034-9

  72. Packard MG, McGaugh JL (1996) Inactivation of hippocampus or caudate nucleus with lidocaine differentially affects expression of place and response learning. Neurobiol Learn Mem 65:65–72. https://doi.org/10.1006/nlme.1996.0007

  73. Pecchia T, Vallortigara G (2010) View-based strategy for reorientation by geometry. J Exp Biol 213:2987–2996. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.043315

  74. Pecchia T, Gagliardo A, Vallortigara G (2011) Stable panoramic views facilitate snap-shot like memories for spatial reorientation in homing pigeons. PLoS ONE 6:e22657

  75. Prior H (2006) Lateralization of spatial orientation in birds. In: Malashichev YB, Deckel AW (eds) Behavioral and morphological asymmetries in vertebrates. Landes Bioscience, Austin, pp 75–85

  76. Prior H, Güntürkün O (2001) Parallel working memory for spatial location and food-related object cues in foraging pigeons: binocular and lateralized monocular performance. Learn Mem 8:44–51

  77. Pritchard DJ, Healy SD (2018) Taking an insect-inspired approach to bird navigation. Learn Behav 46:7–22

  78. Pritchard DJ, Hurly TA, Healy SD (2018) Wild hummingbirds require a consistent view of landmarks to pinpoint a goal location. Anim Behav 137:83–94

  79. Rashid N, Andrew RJ (1989) Right hemisphere advantage for topographical orientation in the domestic chick. Neuropsychologia 27:937–948. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(89)90069-9

  80. Regolin L, Vallortigara G, Zanforlin M (1995) Object and spatial representations in detour problems by chicks. Anim Behav 49:195–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(95)80167-7

  81. Rogers LJ (1990) Light input and the reversal of functional lateralization in the chicken brain. Behav Brain Res 38:211–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-4328(90)90176-f

  82. Rogers L (1996) Behavioral, structural and neurochemical asymmetries in the avian brain: a model system for studying visual development and processing. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 20:487–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7634(95)00024-0

  83. Rogers LJ (2008) Development and function of lateralization in the avian brain. Brain Res Bull Spec Issue Brain Mech Cogn Behav Birds 76:235–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2008.02.001

  84. Rogers LJ, Andrew R (2002) Comparative vertebrate lateralization. Cambridge University Press, New York

  85. Rogers LJ, Bolden SW (1991) Light-dependent development and asymmetry of visual projections. Neurosci Lett 121:63–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3940(91)90650-i

  86. Rogers LJ, Deng C (1999) Light experience and lateralization of the two visual pathways in the chick. Behav Brain Res 98:277–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4328(98)00094-1

  87. Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G (2015) When and why did brains break symmetry? Symmetry 7:2181–2194. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym7042181

  88. Rogers LJ, Zucca P, Vallortigara G (2004) Advantages of having a lateralized brain. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 271:S420–S422. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2004.0200

  89. Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G, Andrew RJ (2013) Divided brains: the biology and behaviour of brain asymmetries. Cambridge University Press, New York

  90. Rosa-Salva O, Regolin L, Floresco SB, Vallortigara G (2012) Cerebral and behavioural assymetries in animal social recognition. Comp Cogn Behav Rev. https://doi.org/10.3819/ccbr.2012.70006

  91. Rugani R, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2011) Summation of large numerousness by newborn chicks. Psychol Front. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00179

  92. Rugani R, Rosa Salva O, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2015) Brain asymmetry modulates perception of biological motion in newborn chicks (Gallus gallus). Behav Brain Res 290:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2015.04.032

  93. Rugani R, Vallortigara G, Regolin L (2016) Mapping number to space in the two hemispheres of the avian brain. Neurobiol Learn Mem 133:13–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nlm.2016.05.010

  94. Sherry DF, Vaccarino AL (1989) Hippocampus and memory for food caches in black-capped chickadees. Behav Neurosci 103:308–318

  95. Shettleworth SJ (2005) Taking the best for learning. Behav Processes 69:147–149

  96. Shettleworth SJ (2010) Clever animals and killjoy explanations in comparative psychology. Trends Cogn Sci 14(11):477–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.07.002

  97. Sovrano VA, Vallortigara G (2006) Dissecting the geometric module: a sense linkage for metric and landmark information in animals’ spatial reorientation. Psychol Sci 17:616–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01753.x

  98. Spetch ML, Rust TB, Kamil AC, Jones JE (2003) Searching by rules: Pigeons’ (Columba livia) landmark-based search according to constant bearing or constant distance. J Comp Psychol 117(2):123–132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.117.2.123

  99. Spink AJ, Tegelenbosch RAJ, Buma MOS, Noldus LPJJ (2001) The EthoVision video tracking system—a tool for behavioral phenotyping of transgenic mice. Physiol Behav 73(5):731–744. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0031-9384(01)00530-3

  100. Sutton JE, Newcombe NS (2014) The hippocampus is not a geometric module: processing environment geometry during reorientation. Front Hum Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00596

  101. Tolman EC (1948) Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychol Rev 55:189–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061626

  102. Tommasi L, Vallortigara G (2000) Searching for the center: spatial cognition in the domestic chick (Gallus gallus). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 26(4):477–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.26.4.477

  103. Tommasi L, Vallortigara G (2001) Encoding of geometric and landmark information in the left and right hemisphere of the avian brain. Behav Neurosci 115:602–613

  104. Tommasi L, Vallortigara G (2004) Hemispheric processing of landmark and geometric information in male and female domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Behav Brain Res 155:85–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2004.04.004

  105. Tommasi L, Vallortigara G, Zanforlin M (1997) Young chickens learn to localize the centre of a spatial environment. J Comp Physiol A 180:567–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003590050073

  106. Tommasi L, Chiandetti C, Pecchia T, Sovrano VA, Vallortigara G (2012) From natural geometry to spatial cognition. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 36(2):799–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2011.12.007

  107. Vallortigara G (1996) Learning of colour and position cues in domestic chicks: males are better at position, females at colour. Behav Processes 36:289–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(95)00063-1

  108. Vallortigara G (2000) Comparative neuropsychology of the dual brain: a stroll through animals’ left and right perceptual worlds. Brain Lang 73:189–219. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2000.2303

  109. Vallortigara G (2009) Animals as natural geometers. In: Tommasi L, Nadel L, Peterson M (eds) Cognitive biology: evolutionary and developmental perspectives on mind, brain and behavior. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 83–104

  110. Vallortigara G, Rogers LJ (2005) Survival with an asymmetrical brain. Behav Brain Sci 28:575–633

  111. Vallortigara G, Zanforlin M (1986) Position learning in chicks. Behav. Processes 12:23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(86)90067-7

  112. Vallortigara G, Zanforlin M, Pasti G (1990) Geometric modules in animals’ spatial representations: a test with chicks (Gallus gallus domesticus). J Comp Psychol 104:248–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.104.3.248

  113. Vallortigara G, Feruglio M, Sovrano VA (2005) Reorientation by geometric and landmark information in environments of different size. Dev Sci 8:393–401

  114. Vallortigara G, Regolin L, Chiandetti C, Rugani R (2010) Rudiments of mind: Insights through the chick model on number and space cognition in animals. Comp Cogn Behav Rev 5:78–99. https://doi.org/10.3819/ccbr.2010.50004

  115. Wallraff HG (2005) Avian navigation: pigeon homing as paradigm. Springer, Berlin

  116. Watanabe S, Mayer U, Bischof HJ (2008) Pattern discrimination is affected by entopallial but not by hippocampal lesions in zebra finches. Behav Brain Res 190:201–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2008.02.035

  117. Wehner R, Michel B, Antonsen P (1996) Visual navigation in insects: coupling of egocentric and geocentric information. J Exp Biol 199:141–146

  118. Wiltschko W, Wiltschko R (2005) Magnetic orientation and magnetoreception in birds and other animals. J Comp Physiol A 191:675–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00359-005-0627-7

  119. Wiltschko W, Wiltschko R (2017) Homing pigeons as a model for avian navigation? J Avian Biol 48(1):66–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/jav.01270

  120. Wilzeck C, Prior H, Kelly DM (2009) Geometry and landmark representation by pigeons: evidence for species-differences in the hemispheric organization of spatial information processing? Eur J Neurosci 29:813–822

  121. Zeil J (1993) Orientation flights of solitary wasps (Cerceris; Sphecidae; Hymenoptera). J Comp Physiol A 172:189–222

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Uwe Mayer.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Morandi-Raikova, A., Vallortigara, G. & Mayer, U. The use of spatial and local cues for orientation in domestic chicks (Gallus gallus). Anim Cogn 23, 367–387 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-019-01342-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Spatial orientation
  • Spatial cues
  • Local cues
  • Lateralization
  • Monocular eye occlusion
  • Domestic chicks (Gallus gallus)