A New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) creatively re-designs tools by bending or unbending aluminium strips

Abstract

Previous observations of a New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) spontaneously bending wire and using it as a hook [Weir et al. (2002) Science 297:981] have prompted questions about the extent to which these animals ‘understand’ the physical causality involved in how hooks work and how to make them. To approach this issue we examine how the same subject (“Betty”) performed in three experiments with novel material, which needed to be either bent or unbent in order to function to retrieve food. These tasks exclude the possibility of success by repetition of patterns of movement similar to those employed before. Betty quickly developed novel techniques to bend the material, and appropriately modified it on four of five trials when unbending was required. She did not mechanically apply a previously learned set of movements to the new situations, and instead sought new solutions to each problem. However, the details of her behaviour preclude concluding definitely that she understood and planned her actions: in some cases she probed with the unmodified tools before modifying them, or attempted to use the unmodified (unsuitable) end of the tool after modification. Gauging New Caledonian crows’ level of understanding is not yet possible, but the observed behaviour is consistent with a partial understanding of physical tasks at a level that exceeds that previously attained by any other non-human subject, including apes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. 1.

    It is also interesting to note that Betty managed to “outwit” the experimenters on several occasions, obtaining the food using techniques that had not been anticipated. While these observations do not necessarily shed light on the questions this study set out to address, they do illustrate the flexible, innovative nature of this individual's approach to solving problems.

References

  1. Anderson JR (2001) [Review of Folk physics for apes: The chimpanzee's theory of how the world works, by Daniel Povinelli]. Anim Behav 61:1042–1043 DOI 10.1006/anbe.2001.1694

  2. Anderson JR, Henneman MC (1994) Solutions to a tool-use problem in a pair of Cebus apella. Mammalia 58:351–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Biro D, Inoue-Nakamura N, Tonooka R, Yamakoshi G, Sousa C, Matsuzawa T (2003) Cultural innovation and transmission of tool use in wild chimpanzees: evidence from field experiments. Anim Cogn 6:213–223 DOI 10.1007/s10071-003-0183-x

    Google Scholar 

  4. Butler AB, Manger PR, Lindahl BIB, Arhem P (2005) Evolution of the neural basis of consciousness: a bird-mammal comparison. BioEssays 27:923–936 DOI 10.1002/bies.20280

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2002) Tool selectivity in a non-mammal, the New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides). Anim Cogn 5:71–78 DOI 10.1007/s10071-002-0130-2

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2004) Selection of tool diameter by New Caledonian crows Corvus moneduloides. Anim Cogn 7:121–127 DOI 10.1007/s10071-003-0202-y

    Google Scholar 

  7. de Kloet ER, Oitzl MS, Joels M (1999) Stress and cognition: are corticosteroids good or bad guys? Trends Neurosci 22:422–426

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Defeyter MA, German TP (2003) Acquiring an understanding of design: evidence from children's insight problem solving. Cognition 89:133–155 DOI 10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00098-2

    Google Scholar 

  9. Emery NJ, Clayton NS (2004) The mentality of crows: convergent evolution of intelligence in corvids and apes. Science 306:1903–1907 DOI 10.1126/science.1098410

    Google Scholar 

  10. Emery NJ, Dally JM, Clayton NS (2004) Western scrub-jays (Aphelocoma californica) use cognitive strategies to protect their caches from thieving conspecifics. Anim Cogn 7:37–44 DOI 10.1007/s10071-003-0178-7

    Google Scholar 

  11. Epstein R, Kirshnit CE, Lanza RP, Rubin LC (1984) Insight in the pigeon: antecedents and determinants of an intelligent performance. Nature 308:61–62

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Goodall J (1986) The chimpanzees of Gombe: patterns of behavior. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Griffin DR, Speck GB (2004) New evidence of animal consciousness. Anim Cogn 7:5–18 DOI 10.1007/s10071-003-0203-x

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hauser MD (2001) Elementary, my dear chimpanzee. Science 291:440–441 DOI 10.1126/science.1057937

    Google Scholar 

  15. Higuchi H (1986) Bait-fishing by the green-backed heron Ardeola striata in Japan. Ibis 128:285–290

    Google Scholar 

  16. Higuchi H (1988) Individual differences in bait fishing by the green-backed heron Ardeola striata associated with territory quality. Ibis 130:39–44

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hirata S, Celli ML (2003) Role of mothers in the acquisition of tool-use behaviours by captive infant chimpanzees. Anim Cogn 6:235–244 DOI 10.1007/s10071-003-0187-6

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hunt GR (1996) Manufacture and use of hook-tools by New Caledonian crows. Nature 379:249–251 DOI 10.1038/379249a0

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hunt GR (2000) Human-like, population-level specialization in the manufacture of pandanus tools by New Caledonian crows Corvus moneduloides. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:403–413 DOI 10.1098/rspb.2000.1015

  20. Hunt GR, Gray RD (2002) Species-wide manufacture of stick-type tools by New Caledonian crows. Emu 102:349–353 DOI 10.1071/MU01056

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hunt GR, Gray RD (2003) Diversification and cumulative evolution in New Caledonian crow tool manufacture. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:867–874 DOI 10.1098/rspb.2002.2299

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hunt GR, Gray RD (2004a) The crafting of hook tools by wild New Caledonian crows. Proc R Soc Lond B 271(Suppl):S88–S90 DOI 10.1098/rsbl.2003.0085

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hunt GR, Gray RD (2004b) Direct observations of pandanus-tool manufacture and use by a New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides). Anim Cogn 7:114–120 DOI 10.1007/s10071-003-0200-0

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hunt GR, Rutledge RB, Gray RD (2006) The right tool for the job: what strategy do wild New Caledonian crows use? Anim Cogn, DOI 10.1007/s10071-006-0047-2

  25. Jarvis ED, Güntürkün O, Bruce L, Csillag A, Karten H, Kuenzel W, Medina L, Paxinos G, Perkel DJ, Shimizu T, Striedter G, Wild JM, Ball GF, Dugas-Ford J, Durand SE, Hough GE, Husband S, Kubikova L, Lee DW, Mello CV, Powers A, Siang C, Smulders TV, Wada K, White SA, Yamamoto K, Yu J, Reiner A, Butler AB (2005) Avian brains and a new understanding of vertebrate brain evolution. Nat Rev Neurosci 6:151–159 DOI 10.1038/nrn1606

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kacelnik A, Chappell J, Weir AAS, Kenward B (2006) Cognitive adaptations for tool-related behaviour in New Caledonian crows. In: Wasserman EA, Zentall TR (eds) Comparative cognition: experimental explorations of animal intelligence. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 515–528

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kenward B, Weir AAS, Rutz C, Kacelnik A (2005) Tool manufacture by naive juvenile crows. Nature 433:121 DOI 10.1038/433121a

  28. Kenward B, Rutz C, Weir AAS, Kacelnik A (in press) Development of tool use in New Caledonian crows (Corvus moneduloides): stereotyped action patterns and social influence. Anim Behav

  29. Klüver H (1937) Re-examination of implement-using behavior in a Cebus monkey after an interval of three years. Acta Psychologica 2:347–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Köhler W (1925) The mentality of apes. Harcourt Brace, London

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lockman JJ (2000) A perception-action perspective on tool use development. Child Dev 71:137–144 DOI 10.1111/1467-8624.00127

    Google Scholar 

  32. Lonsdorf EV (2005) Sex differences in the development of termite-fishing skills in the wild chimpanzees, Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii, of Gombe National Park, Tanzania. Anim Behav 70:673–683 DOI 10.1016/j.anbehav.2004.12.014

  33. Lonsdorf EV (2006) What is the role of mothers in the acquisition of termite-fishing behaviors in wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii)? Anim Cogn 9:36–46 DOI 10.1007/s10071-005-0002-7

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lonsdorf EV, Eberly LE, Pusey AE (2004) Sex differences in learning in chimpanzees. Nature 428:715–716 DOI 10.1038/428715a

    Google Scholar 

  35. Lucas JR (1982) The biophysics of pit construction by antlion larvae (Myrmeleon, Neuroptera). Anim Behav 30:651–664

    Google Scholar 

  36. Machado A, Silva FJ (2003) ``You can lead an ape to a tool, but …: A review of Povinelli's Folk physics for apes: the chimpanzee's theory of how the world works.'' J Exp Anal Behav 79:267–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mackintosh NJ (1994) Animal learning and cognition. Academic Press, San Diego, London

    Google Scholar 

  38. McGrew WC (1992) Chimpanzee material culture: implications for human evolution. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  39. Povinelli DJ (ed) (2000) Folk physics for apes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Povinelli DJ, Reaux JE, Theall LA, Giambrone S (2000a) The rope, hook, touching-stick, and related problems: the question of physical connection. In: Povinelli DJ (ed) Folk physics for apes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp 206–253

    Google Scholar 

  41. Povinelli DJ, Reaux JE, Theall LA, Giambrone S (2000b) The question of tool modification. In: Povinelli DJ (ed) Folk physics for apes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp 271–296

    Google Scholar 

  42. Povinelli DJ, Theall LA, Reaux JE, Giambrone S (2000c) The tool-insertion problem: the question of shape. In: Povinelli DJ (ed) Folk physics for apes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp 173–205

    Google Scholar 

  43. Reaux JE, Povinelli DJ (2000) The trap-tube problem. In: Povinelli DJ (ed) Folk physics for apes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp 108–131

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ricklefs RE (2004) The cognitive face of avian life histories: the 2003 Margaret Morse Nice lecture. Wilson Bull 116:119–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sanz C, Morgan D, Gulick S (2004) New insights into chimpanzees, tools, and termites from the Congo basin. Am Nat 164:567–581

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Schwartz B, Wasserman EA, Robbins SJ (2002) Psychology of learning and behavior, 5th edn. W.W. Norton, New York, NY; London

  47. Silva FJ, Page DM, Silva KM (2005) Methodological-conceptual problems in the study of chimpanzees’ folk physics: how studies with adult humans can help. Learn Behav 33:47–58

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Spence KW (1938) Gradual versus sudden solution of discrimination problems by chimpanzees. J Comp Psychol 25:213–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sterelny K (2003) Charting control-space: comments on Susan Hurley's ‘Animal action in the space of reasons’. Mind Lang 18:257–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sugiyama Y (1985) The brush-stick of chimpanzees found in south-west Cameroon and their cultural characteristics. Primates 26:361–374

    Google Scholar 

  51. Sugiyama Y (1997) Social tradition and the use of tool-composites by wild chimpanzees. Evol Anthropol 6:23–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Tebbich S, Bshary R (2004) Cognitive abilities related to tool use in the woodpecker finch, Cactospiza pallida. Anim Behav 67:689–697 DOI 10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.08.003

    Google Scholar 

  53. Thelen E (1979) Rhythmical stereotypies in normal human infants. Anim Behav 27:699–715

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Thelen E (1981) Rhythmical behavior in infancy: an ethological perspective. Dev Psychol 17:237–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Tonooka R (2001) Leaf-folding behavior for drinking water by wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) at Bossou, Guinea. Anim Cogn 4:325–334 DOI 10.1007/s100710100110

    Google Scholar 

  56. Visalberghi E, Trinca L (1989) Tool use in capuchin monkeys: distinguishing between performing and understanding. Primates 30:511–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Visalberghi E, Limongelli L (1994) Lack of comprehension of cause–effect relations in tool-using capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 108:15–22

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Visalberghi E, Fragaszy DM, Savage-Rumbaugh ES (1995) Performance in a tool-using task by common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes), bonobos (Pan paniscus), an orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus), and capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). J Comp Psychol 109:52–60

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Watanabe S, Huber L (2006) Animal logics: decisions in the absence of human language. Anim Cogn, DOI 10.1007/s10071-006-0043-6

  60. Weir AAS, Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2002) Shaping of hooks in New Caledonian crows. Science 297:981 DOI 10.1126/science.1073433

  61. Weir AAS, Kenward B, Chappell J, Kacelnik A (2004) Lateralization of tool use in New Caledonian crows (Corvus moneduloides). Proc R Soc Lond B 271(Suppl):S344–S346 DOI 10.1098/rsbl.2004.0183

    Google Scholar 

  62. Whiten A (2001) Tool tests challenge chimpanzees. Nature 409:133 DOI 10.1038/35051638

  63. Whiten A (2005) The second inheritance system of chimpanzees and humans. Nature 437:52–55 DOI 10.1038/nature04023

    Google Scholar 

  64. Whiten A, Horner V, de Waal FBM (2005) Conformity to cultural norms of tool use in chimpanzees. Nature 437:737–740 DOI 10.1038/nature04047

    Google Scholar 

  65. Whiten A, Goodall J, McGrew WC, Nishida T, Reynolds V, Sugiyama Y, Tutin CEG, Wrangham RW, Boesch C (1999) Cultures in chimpanzees. Nature 399:682–685 DOI 10.1038/21415

    Google Scholar 

  66. Whiten A, Goodall J, McGrew WC, Nishida T, Reynolds V, Sugiyama Y, Tutin CEG, Wrangham RW, Boesch C (2001) Charting cultural variation in chimpanzees. Behaviour 138:1481–1516 DOI 10.1163/156853901317367717

    Google Scholar 

  67. Wilson B, Mackintosh NJ, Boakes RA (1985) Transfer of relational rules in matching and oddity learning by pigeons and corvids. Q J Exp Psychol B 37:313–332

    Google Scholar 

  68. Zorina ZA (2005) Animal intelligence: laboratory experiments and observations in nature. Zool Zhurnal 84:134–148

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Jackie Chappell, Ben Kenward, Christian Rutz, Lucas Bluff, Jo Wimpenny, and Stephen Barlow, for many discussions about experimental design and interpretation. David Wilson looked after Betty through her life in Oxford with affection and efficiency. Thanks to Charlotte Burn and three anonymous referees for helpful comments on the manuscript. David Palmer and Tony Price helped design and build the experimental room and its entrance-control mechanism. The experiments described here comply with all applicable laws of the United Kingdom, where they were carried out. This work was funded by a scholarship from the Wellcome Trust to AASW and BBSRC grant BB/C517392/1 to AK.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex A. S. Weir.

Additional information

This contribution is part of the special issue “Animal Logics” (Watanabe and Huber 2006).

Electronic supplementary material

Video S5: Video of Trial 3, Experiment 1. This shows the first trial on which the subject modified the aluminium strips. See Table S1 for a detailed description of the trial. Format: Windows Media Video; duration: 6min 45s.

Video S6: Video of Trial 32, Experiment 1. This shows an example of the ‘bend’ technique that the subject developed for modifying the aluminium strips, towards the end of the experiment. See Table S1 for a detailed description of the trial. Format: Windows Media Video; duration: 21s.

Video S7: Video of Trial 3, Experiment 3. This shows the first time the subject unbent the aluminium strip. After food-retrieval, the unbending action is replayed in slow-motion. The clip starts 4min 7s into the trial, after the subject had already probed with the tool 4 times (for a total of 16s), but before she had modified it. After modification, there is a break in the clip during which the subject probed for the food 4 times (for 50s), twice with each end of the tool. See Table S3 for a detailed description of the trial. Format: Windows Media Video; duration: 55s.

Video S8: Video of Trial 4, Experiment 3. On this trial the subject unbent the tool using a similar action to Trial 3. As with Video S7, the clip ends with a replay of the unbending action in slow-motion. The clip starts 3min 15s into the trial, after the subject had already probed with the tool 7 times (for 37s), but before she had modified it. See Table S3 for a detailed description of the trial. Format: Windows Media Video; duration: 51s.

Table S1: Trial-by-trial description of Experiment 1. ‘Trial code’ summarises the result of the trial (O = own tool; U = unmodified strip; M = modified strip; f = failure (to get food); s = success). ‘Duration’ is the length of time from first interacting with the apparatus to retrieving food (minutes : seconds). ‘Tool dimensions’ gives the length and width of the tool at the start of the trial (mm).

Table S2: Trial-by-trial description of Experiment 2. Columns as above, except ‘Success’ which indicates whether the subject successfully retrieved the food (y = yes; n = no)

Table S3: Trial-by-trial description of Experiment 3. Columns as above.

Fig. S4: Final tool shapes in Experiment 1. In each photo, the number refers to the trial on which the tool was made, and the scale bar represents 3 cm.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Weir, A.A.S., Kacelnik, A. A New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides) creatively re-designs tools by bending or unbending aluminium strips. Anim Cogn 9, 317 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-006-0052-5

Download citation

Keywords

  • New Caledonian crows
  • Tool use
  • Tool modification
  • Planning
  • Folk physics