Abstract. Neurofibrillary pathology in Alzheimer's dementia (AD) is associated with cognitive impairments and cortical thinning, and begins in medial perirhinal cortex (mPRC) before entering entorhinal cortex (ERC). Thus, mPRC dysfunction (e.g., semantic object memory impairments) may predate or accompany ERC (i.e., episodic memory) dysfunction in the preclinical course of typical AD. We developed formulae estimating mPRC and ERC integrity (i.e., cortical thickness) using common neuropsychological tests in 31 healthy individuals and 58 early AD patients. These formulae estimated the longitudinal courses of mPRC and ERC functioning in independent groups of 28 optimally healthy individuals who developed AD (NC-AD) over 2.8-13.4 years and 28 pairwise-matched, stable, healthy individuals (NC-NC). Mixed models demonstrated significantly worse NC-AD than NC-NC estimated mPRC and ERC functioning at the earliest observation,
Spontaneous mirror self-recognition is achieved by only a limited number of species, suggesting a sharp “cognitive Rubicon” that only few can pass. But is the demarcation line that sharp? In studies on monkeys, who do not recognize themselves in a mirror, animals can make a difference between their mirror image and an unknown conspecific. This evidence speaks for a gradualist view of mirror self-recognition. We hypothesize that such a gradual process possibly consists of at least two independent aptitudes, the ability to detect synchronicity between self- and foreign movement and the cognitive understanding that the mirror reflection is oneself. Pigeons are known to achieve the first but fail at the second aptitude. We therefore expected them to treat their mirror image differently from an unknown pigeon, without being able to understand that the mirror reflects their own image. We tested pigeons in a task where they either approached a mirror or a Plexiglas barrier to feed. Behind the Plexiglas an unknown pigeon walked at the same time toward the food bowl. Thus, we pitched a condition with a mirror-self and a foreign bird against each other, with both of them walking close toward the food bowl. By a detailed analysis of a whole suit of behavioral details, our results make it likely that the foreign pigeon was treated as a competitor while the mirror image caused hesitation as if being an uncanny conspecific. Our results are akin to those with monkeys and show that pigeons do not equal their mirror reflection with a conspecific, although being unable to recognize themselves in the mirror.
The opportunity and the information available to secure food resources drives foraging behaviour. We tested how inconsistent hole-food pairings and coverings could alter foraging performance, even when food availability is held constant. In our first experiment, we exposed pigeons (Columba livia) to a board in which each of the 60 covered holes contained one food item and to another board in which only one third of the 180 covered holes randomly contained one food item. In a second experiment, only the 60-hole board was used and the holes were not covered. The pigeons increased their body weight, gave fewer pecks per hole, revisited holes less often, and inspected fewer adjacent holes with 180 rather than 60 covered holes while eating similar amounts. However, their pecks were disproportionately higher near the edges of the board with 60 covered holes. This behaviour was not evident in the second experiment, when the food items were visible and individuals could know where food was available. Thus, the information about food location may drive foraging behaviour more directly than the information about food availability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.