Literature DB >> 25452077

Wild, free-living rufous hummingbirds do not use geometric cues in a spatial task.

Mark A W Hornsby1, T Andrew Hurly2, Caitlin E Hamilton3, David J Pritchard4, Susan D Healy5.   

Abstract

In the laboratory, many species orient themselves using the geometric properties of an enclosure or array and geometric information is often preferred over visual cues. Whether animals use geometric cues when relocating rewarded locations in the wild, however, has rarely been investigated. We presented free-living rufous hummingbirds with a rectangular array of four artificial flowers to investigate learning of rewarded locations using geometric cues. In one treatment, we rewarded two of four flowers at diagonally opposite corners. In a second treatment, we provided a visual cue to the rewarded flower by connecting the flowers with "walls" consisting of four dowels (three white, one blue) laid on the ground connecting each of the flowers. Neither treatment elicited classical geometry results; instead, hummingbirds typically chose one particular flower over all others. When we exchanged that flower with another, hummingbirds tended to visit the original flower. These results suggest that (1) hummingbirds did not use geometric cues, but instead may have used a visually derived cue on the flowers themselves, and (2) using geometric cues may have been more difficult than using visual characteristics. Although hummingbirds typically prefer spatial over visual information, we hypothesize that they will not use geometric cues over stable visual features but that they make use of small, flower-specific visual cues. Such cues may play a more important role in foraging decisions than previously thought.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Geometry; Navigation; Selasphorus rufus; Spatial orientation; Visual features

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25452077     DOI: 10.1016/j.beproc.2014.10.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Processes        ISSN: 0376-6357            Impact factor:   1.777


  5 in total

1.  Numerical ordinality in a wild nectarivore.

Authors:  Tas I F Vámos; Maria C Tello-Ramos; T Andrew Hurly; Susan D Healy
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-07-08       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  Treating hummingbirds as feathered bees: a case of ethological cross-pollination.

Authors:  D J Pritchard; M C Tello Ramos; F Muth; S D Healy
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2017-12-06       Impact factor: 3.703

3.  Estimating on the fly: The approximate number system in rufous hummingbirds (Selasphorus rufus).

Authors:  Mia Corliss; Theo Brown; T Andrew Hurly; Susan D Healy; Maria C Tello-Ramos
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2020-12-14       Impact factor: 1.986

4.  Size is relative: use of relational concepts by wild hummingbirds.

Authors:  Theo Brown; T Andrew Hurly; Susan D Healy; Maria C Tello-Ramos
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 5.  Taking an insect-inspired approach to bird navigation.

Authors:  David J Pritchard; Susan D Healy
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.986

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.