Arthropod spatial cognition

Abstract

The feats of arthropods, and of the well-studied insects and crustaceans in particular, have fascinated scientists and laymen alike for centuries. Arthropods show a diverse repertoire of cognitive feats, of often unexpected sophistication. Despite their smaller brains and resulting lower neuronal capacity, the cognitive abilities of arthropods are comparable to, or may even exceed, those of vertebrates, depending on the species compared. Miniature brains often provide parsimonious but smart solutions for complex behaviours or ecologically relevant problems. This makes arthropods inspiring subjects for basic research, bionics, and robotics. Investigations of arthropod spatial cognition have originally concentrated on the honeybee, an animal domesticated for several thousand years. Bees are easy to keep and handle, making this species amenable to experimental study. However, there are an estimated 5–10 million arthropod species worldwide, with a broad diversity of lifestyles, ecology, and cognitive abilities. This high diversity provides ample opportunity for comparative analyses. Comparative study, rather than focusing on single model species, is well suited to scrutinise the link between ecological niche, lifestyle, and cognitive competence. It also allows the discovery of general concepts that are transferable between distantly related groups of organisms. With species diversity and a comparative approach in mind, this special issue compiles four review articles and ten original research reports from a spectrum of arthropod species. These contributions range from the well-studied hymenopterans, and ants in particular, to chelicerates and crustaceans. They thus present a broad spectrum of glimpses into current research on arthropod spatial cognition, and together they cogently emphasise the merits of research into arthropod cognitive achievements.

Minimal physicalism as a scale-free substrate for cognition and consciousness

“…A well-established literature extends the concepts of consciousness—the capability of having phenomenal experiences, however basic or minimally structured—and cognition to phylogenetically basal systems, including free-living or facultatively communal unicells, whether pro- or eukaryotic ( Maturana and Varela 1980 ; Pattee 1982 ; Stewart 1996 ; di Primio et al 2000 ; Lyon 2015 ; Baluška and Levin 2016 ; Baluška and Reber 2019 , 2021 ; Levin 2019 , 2020 ; Fields and Levin 2020a ; Lyon 2020 ; Baluška et al 2021 ), plants ( Calvo and Kiejzer 2009 ; Gagliano and Grimonprez 2015 ; Baluška et al 2018 ; Debono and Souza 2019 ; Calvo et al 2020 ), and aneural or lower (than mammals, birds, or cephalopods) complexity neural metazoa, particularly flatworms ( Shomrat and Levin 2013 ; Inoue et al 2015 ; Levin 2020 ) and insects ( Menzel 2012 ; Perry et al 2017 ; Pfeffer and Wolf 2020 ). Like the extension of these concepts from humans to nonhuman mammals and then to big-brained nonmammals, this extension to more basal organisms was initially motivated by observations of communication, learning, and behavioral flexibility, and by functional similarities between the mechanisms supporting information processing and learning in basal systems and in more complex systems such as mammals.…”

The effect of unexpected rewards on decision making in cuttlefish

“…It should be noted that the aforementioned cognitive abilities and intelligence are not limited to cephalopods only. In fact, there are some evidence supporting that arthropods, particularly bees and ants, also have behavioral flexibility and advanced cognitive abilities 41 , 42 .…”

Orientation behavior of riparian long‐jawed orb weavers (Tetragnatha elongata) after displacement over water

“…The cognitive requirements of the various mechanisms of orientation differ. Yet, many of the seemingly complex mechanisms have been documented among organisms that were previously thought to lack such abilities (i.e., invertebrates), and the previous decades have yielded explosive growth in studies evaluating orientation in these organisms (see references in Gaffin & Curry, 2020; Ortega‐Escobar, 2020; Pfeffer & Wolf, 2020; Warrant & Dacke, 2010). For example, the parasitic wasp Hyposoter hotiola uses visual landmarks to track host eggs and find potential plants that may contain those eggs (Van Nouhuys & Kaartinen, 2008).…”

“…These may be coupled with navigational cues (compass directions) with all systems aligned to create a navigational system, which allows the ant to maintain a trajectory toward a specific goal (Freas & Spetch, 2019; Pfeffer & Whittlinger, 2016; Wehner, 2003; Wehner et al., 2016). Even complex navigational abilities utilizing a map and compass sense can be found among arthropods (Pfeffer & Wolf, 2020). For example, dung beetles ( Scarabaeus lamarcki ) use a celestial compass as a cue to guide their navigations indicating map‐based navigation (Dacke et al., 2014).…”