Advertisement

Animal Cognition

, Volume 18, Issue 5, pp 1181–1185 | Cite as

Carrion crows learn to discriminate between calls of reliable and unreliable conspecifics

  • Claudia A. F. Wascher
  • Friederike Hillemann
  • Daniela Canestrari
  • Vittorio Baglione
Short Communication

Abstract

Partner choice on the basis of an individual’s reliability is expected to stabilize social interactions. In this experiment, we tested whether carrion crows (Corvus corone corone) learn to differentiate between calls of reliable or unreliable individuals. Crows were kept in an aviary that comprised four visually but not acoustically isolated compartments, separated by a central room. In an association phase, a dead crow placed in the central compartment was visible only to one of the four crow groups, whilst alert calls of a conspecific were played back. Therefore, these calls were reliable for that group, but unreliable for the three other groups. The procedure was repeated, using a different reliable caller for each group. In two test sessions, 1 month apart, reliable and unreliable model individuals were played back, but no dead crow was presented. We quantified birds’ attention behaviour and the number of vocalisations emitted. In the association phase, crows were more attentive towards the reliable compared with the unreliable stimuli and called more in response to reliable compared to unreliable individuals. In the test and repeat phase, attention behaviour did not differ between reliability conditions, but the pattern of vocal behaviour reversed, with crows calling less frequent when listening to reliable compared with unreliable calls. Vocal responses of crows suggest that they can discriminate between reliable and unreliable callers.

Keywords

Reliability Alert calls Carrion crows Corvus corone corone 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Debbie Kelly and three anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, project CGL2011-27260, to V. B.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics statement

The authors declare that the study complies with the animal experimental regulations of Spain. Keeping of captive birds was authorised by the Regional Council of Castile and León (section zoology 005074), and study subjects remained housed in captivity before and after completion of the present study for further non-invasive observations and experiments.

Supplementary material

10071_2015_879_MOESM1_ESM.tif (14.5 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (TIFF 14823 kb)
10071_2015_879_MOESM2_ESM.docx (20 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 21 kb)

References

  1. Akçay C, Wood WE, Searcy WA et al (2009) Good neighbour, bad neighbour: song sparrows retaliate against aggressive rivals. Anim Behav 78:97–102. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.03.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baglione V, Marcos JM, Canestrari D, Ekman J (2002) Direct fitness benefits of group living in a complex cooperative society of carrion crows, Corvus corone corone. Anim Behav 64:887–893. doi: 10.1006/anbe.2002.2007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baglione V, Canestrari D, Marcos JM, Ekman J (2003) Kin selection in cooperative alliances of carrion crows. Science 300:1947–1949. doi: 10.1126/science.1082429 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Blumstein DT, Verneyre L, Daniel JC (2004) Reliability and the adaptive utility of discrimination among alarm callers. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 271:1851–1857. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2808 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boeckle M, Bugnyar T (2012) Long-term memory for affiliates in ravens. Curr Biol 22:801–806. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.03.023 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolker BM, Fournier D, Skaug H et al (2012) Generalized linear mixed models using AD model builder. R package version 0.7.7Google Scholar
  7. Bugnyar T (2013) Social cognition in ravens. Comp Cognit Behav Rev 8:1–12. doi: 10.3819/ccbr.2013.80001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chamberlain R, Cornwell GW (1971) Selected vocalizations of the common crow. Auk 88:613–634Google Scholar
  9. Chiarati E, Canestrari D, Vera R et al (2010) Linear and stable dominance hierarchies in cooperative carrion crows. Ethology 116:346–356. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2010.01741.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chiarati E, Canestrari D, Vera R, Baglione V (2012) Subordinates benefit from exploratory dominants: response to novel food in cooperatively breeding carrion crows. Anim Behav 83:103–109. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.10.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gintis H, Smith EA, Bowles S (2001) Costly signaling and cooperation. J Theor Biol 213:103–119. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.2001.2406 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Godard R (1993) Tit for tat among neighboring hooded warblers. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 33:45–50. doi: 10.1007/BF00164345 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hillemann F, Bugnyar T, Kotrschal K, Wascher CAF (2014) Waiting for better, not for more: corvids respond to quality in two delay maintenance tasks. Anim Behav 90:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.01.007 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Kondo N, Watanabe S, Izawa EI (2010) A temporal rule in vocal exchange among Large-billed crows Corvus macrorhynchos in Japan. Ornithol Sci 9:83–91. doi: 10.2326/osj.9.83 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Noë R, Hammerstein P (1995) Biological markets. Trends Ecol Evol 10:336–339CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Olendorf R, Getty T, Scribner K (2004) Cooperative nest defence in red—winged blackbirds: reciprocal altruism, kinship or by-product mutualism? Proc R Soc Lond B 271:177–182. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2586 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Searcy WA, Nowicki S (2005) The Evolution of Animal Communication. Reliability and Deception in Signaling Systems. Princeton University Press, OxfordshireGoogle Scholar
  18. R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R foundation for statistical computing. Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org/
  19. Temeles EJ (1994) The role of neighbours in territorial systems: when are they ‘dear enemies’? Anim Behav 47:339–350. doi: 10.1006/anbe.1994.1047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wascher CAF (2015) Individual performance in socio-cognitive tasks predicts social behaviour in carrion crows. Behaviour. doi: 10.1163/1568539X-00003245 Google Scholar
  21. Wascher CAF, Valdez JW, Núnez Cebrian C et al (2014) Social factors modulating attention patterns in carrion crows. Behaviour 151:555–572. doi: 10.1163/1568539X-00003148 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wheeler B (2009) Monkeys crying wolf? Tufted capuchin monkeys use anti-predator calls to usurp resources from conspecifics. Proc R Soc B 276:3013–3018. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0544 PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia A. F. Wascher
    • 1
  • Friederike Hillemann
    • 1
  • Daniela Canestrari
    • 2
    • 3
  • Vittorio Baglione
    • 1
    • 4
  1. 1.Departamento de Ciencias Agro-Forestales Campus La YuteraUniversity of ValladolidPalenciaSpain
  2. 2.Departamento de Biología de Organismos y SistemasUniversity of OviedoOviedoSpain
  3. 3.Unidad Mixta de Investigación en Biodiversidad, Campus de MieresUniversity of OviedoMieresSpain
  4. 4.Sustainable Forest Management Research InstitutePalenciaSpain

Personalised recommendations