Advertisement

Animal Cognition

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 567–576 | Cite as

The cognitive capabilities of farm animals: categorisation learning in dwarf goats (Capra hircus)

  • Susann Meyer
  • Gerd Nürnberg
  • Birger Puppe
  • Jan LangbeinEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

The ability to establish categories enables organisms to classify stimuli, objects and events by assessing perceptual, associative or rational similarities and provides the basis for higher cognitive processing. The cognitive capabilities of farm animals are receiving increasing attention in applied ethology, a development driven primarily by scientifically based efforts to improve animal welfare. The present study investigated the learning of perceptual categories in Nigerian dwarf goats (Capra hircus) by using an automated learning device installed in the animals’ pen. Thirteen group-housed goats were trained in a closed-economy approach to discriminate artificial two-dimensional symbols presented in a four-choice design. The symbols belonged to two categories: category I, black symbols with an open centre (rewarded) and category II, the same symbols but filled black (unrewarded). One symbol from category I and three different symbols from category II were used to define a discrimination problem. After the training of eight problems, the animals were presented with a transfer series containing the training problems interspersed with completely new problems made from new symbols belonging to the same categories. The results clearly demonstrate that dwarf goats are able to form categories based on similarities in the visual appearance of artificial symbols and to generalise across new symbols. However, the goats had difficulties in discriminating specific symbols. It is probable that perceptual problems caused these difficulties. Nevertheless, the present study suggests that goats housed under farming conditions have well-developed cognitive abilities, including learning of open-ended categories. This result could prove beneficial by facilitating animals’ adaptation to housing environments that favour their cognitive capabilities.

Keywords

Dwarf goats Automated learning device Closed-economy Visual discrimination Perceptual categorisation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Katrin Siebert and Dieter Sehland for excellent technical and experimental help. We are also grateful to three anonymous reviewers for commenting on an earlier version of the manuscript. This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (LA 1187/5-1).

References

  1. Bradshaw RH (1991) Discrimination of group members by laying hens Gallus Domesticus. Behav Process 24:143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Coulon M, Deputte B, Heyman Y, Baudoin C (2009) Individual recognition in domestic cattle (Bos taurus): evidence from 2D-images of heads from different breeds. PLoS ONE 4:e4441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Coulon M, Baudoin C, Heyman Y, Deputte B (2011) Cattle discriminate between familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics by using only head visual cues. Anim Cogn 14:279–290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Amato MR, Colombo M (1985) Auditory matching-to-sample in monkeys (Cebus apella). Anim Learn Behav 13:375–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Delius JD (1992) Categorical discrimination of objects and pictures by pigeons. Anim Learn Behav 20:301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Engqvist L (2005) The mistreatment of covariate interaction terms in linear model analyses of behavioural and evolutionary ecology studies. Anim Behav 70:967–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fagot J, Wasserman EA, Young ME (2001) Discriminating the relation between relations: the role of entropy in abstract conceptualization by baboons (Papio papio) and humans (Homo sapiens). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 27:316–328PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Franz H (2001) The influence of training methods on learning behaviour of dwarf goats on an automatic learning device. Arch Tierz 44:553–560Google Scholar
  9. Franz H, Roitberg E (2001) A comparison of learning performance of dwarf goats in visual discrimination tasks with two or four simultaneously offered stimuli. Arch Tierz 44:661–669Google Scholar
  10. Ghirlanda S, Enquist M (2003) A century of generalization. Anim Behav 66:15–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ginane C, Dumont B (2010) Do grazing sheep use species-based categorization to select their diet? Behav Process 84:622–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ginane C, Dumont B (2011) Do sheep (Ovis aries) categorize plant species according to botanical family? Anim Cogn 14:369–376PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hagen K, Broom DM (2003) Cattle discriminate between individual familiar herd members in a learning experiment. Appl Anim Behav Sci 82:13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hanggi EB (1999) Categorization learning in horses (Equus caballus). J Comp Psychol 113:243–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanggi EB (2003) Discrimination learning based on relative size concepts in horses (Equus caballus). Appl Anim Behav Sci 83:201–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hanggi EB, Ingersoll JF (2009) Long-term memory for categories and concepts in horses (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn 12:451–462PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harlow HF (1949) The formation of learning sets. Psychol Rev 56:51–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Herrnstein RJ (1990) Levels of stimulus control—a functional approach. Cognition 37:133–166PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holmes PW (1979) Transfer of matching performance in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav 31:103–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huber L (1995) On the biology of perceptual categorization. Evol Cogn 1:121–138Google Scholar
  21. Huber L (2001) Visual categorization in pigeons. In: Cook RG (ed) Avian visual cognition. On-line: http://www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/huber/default.htm. Accessed 13 Mar 2012
  22. Hursh SR (1980) Economic concepts for the analysis of behavior. J Exp Anal Behav 34:219–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Katz JS, Wright AA, Bodily KD (2007) Issues in the comparative cognition of abstract-concept learning. Comp Cogn Behav Rev 2:79–92PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kendrick KM, Atkins K, Hinton MR, Broad KD, Fabrenys C, Keverne B (1995) Facial and vocal discrimination in sheep. Anim Behav 49:1665–1676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Langbein J, Nürnberg G, Puppe B, Manteuffel G (2006) Self-controlled visual discrimination learning of group-housed dwarf goats (Capra hircus): behavioral strategies and effects of relocation on learning and memory. J Comp Psychol 120:58–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Langbein J, Siebert K, Nürnberg G, Manteuffel G (2007a) Learning to learn during visual discrimination in group housed dwarf goats (Capra hircus). J Comp Psychol 121:447–456PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Langbein J, Siebert K, Nuernberg G, Manteuffel G (2007b) The impact of acoustical secondary reinforcement during shape discrimination learning of dwarf goats (Capra hircus). Appl Anim Behav Sci 103:35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Langbein J, Siebert K, Nuernberg G (2008) Concurrent recall of serially learned visual discrimination problems in dwarf goats (Capra hircus). Behav Process 79:156–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lea SEG, Ryan CME (1983) Feature analysis of pigeons’ acquisition of concept discrimination. In: Commons ML, Herrnstein RJ, Wagner AR (eds) Quantitative analysis of behavior, vol 4. Discrimination processes. MA: Ballinger, Cambridge: 239–253Google Scholar
  30. Lombardi CM (2008) Matching and oddity relational learning by pigeons (Columba livia): transfer from color to shape. Anim Cogn 11:67–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Makino H, Jitsumori M (2007) Discrimination of artificial categories structured by family resemblances: a comparative study in people (Homo sapiens) and pigeons (Columba livia). J Comp Psychol 121:22–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mercado E, Killebrew DA, Pack AA, Macha B, Herman LM (2000) Generalization of “same-different” classification abilities in Bottlenosed Dolphins. Behav Process 50:79–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pack AA, Herman LM, Roitblat HL (1991) Generalization of visual matching and delayed matching by a California sea lion (Zalophus californianus). Anim Learn Behav 19:37–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Range F, Aust U, Steurer M, Huber L (2008) Visual categorization of natural stimuli by domestic dogs. Anim Cogn 11:339–347PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roitberg E, Franz H (2004) Oddity learning by African dwarf goats (Capra hircus). Anim Cogn 7:61–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sappington BF, Goldman L (1994) Discrimination learning and concept formation in the Arabian horse. J Anim Sci 72:3080–3087PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Schusterman RJ, Kastak CR (1993) A California sea lion (Zalophus californianus) is capable of forming equivalence relations. Psychol Rec 43:823–839Google Scholar
  38. Sebeoke TA (1970) Clever Hans phenomenon: communication with horses, whales, and people. NY Academy of Sciences, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Thompson RKR, Oden DL (2000) Categorical perception and conceptual judgments by nonhuman primates: the paleological monkey and the analogical ape. Cogn Sci 24:363–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Urcuioli PJ (2001) Categorization and acquired equivalence. In: Cook RG (ed) Avian visual cognition. On-line: http://www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/urcuioli/default.htm. Accessed 13 Mar 2012
  41. Vaughan WJ, Greene SL (1984) Pigeon visual memory capacity. J Exp Psycol Anim Behav Process 10:256–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Von Fersen L, Delius JD (1989) Long-term retention of many visual patterns by pigeons. Ethology 82:141–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vonk J, MacDonald SE (2002) Natural concepts in a juvenile gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) at three levels of abstraction. J Exp Anal Behav 78:315–332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wasserman EA (1993) Comparative cognition: beginning the second century of the study of animal intelligence. Psychol Bull 113:211–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Werner CW, Rehkämper G (1999) Discrimination of multidimensional geometrical figures by chickens: categorization and pattern-learning. Anim Cogn 2:27–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wright AA, Katz JS (2007) Generalization hypothesis of abstract-concept learning: learning strategies and related issues in Macaca mulatta, Cebus apella, and Columba livia. J Comp Psychol 121:387–397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wright AA, Cook RG, Rivera JJ, Sands SF, Delius JD (1988) Concept learning by pigeons: matching-to-sample with trial-unique video picture stimuli. Anim Learn Behav 16:436–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zayan R, Vauclair J (1998) Categories as paradigms for comparative cognition. Behav Process 42:87–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zentall TR, Galizio M, Critchfield TS (2002) Categorization, concept learning, and behavior analysis: an introduction. J Exp Anal Behav 78:237–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zentall TR, Wasserman EA, Lazareva OF, Thompson RKR, Rattermann MJ (2008) Concept learning in animals. Comp Cogn Behav Rev 3:13–45Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susann Meyer
    • 1
    • 3
  • Gerd Nürnberg
    • 2
  • Birger Puppe
    • 1
    • 3
  • Jan Langbein
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Research Unit Behavioural PhysiologyLeibniz Institute for Farm Animal BiologyDummerstorfGermany
  2. 2.Research Unit Genetics and BiometryLeibniz Institute for Farm Animal BiologyDummerstorfGermany
  3. 3.Behavioural Sciences, Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental SciencesUniversity of RostockRostockGermany

Personalised recommendations