Attempts to condition homing pigeons to magnetic cues in an outdoor flight cage

Abstract

An attempt was made to train 9 homing pigeons to respond to the presence or absence of bar magnets by turning either left or right after flying the length of a 20-ft outdoor flight cage. During initial training, color cues were placed in front of feeding stations on the left and right sides of the cage. The color cues were paired with magnetic cues by attaching either bar magnets or brass bars to the backs ofthe birds. The color cues were then deleted, leaving only the magnetic cues. Each pigeon received about 300 trials of color training followed by about 200 trials of magnet testing. When only magnetic cues remained, none ofthe pigeons were able to choose the correct feeder at greater than chance levels of probability. Portions of this work were submitted to Cornell University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for an undergraduate honors degree by H. McIsaac. The work was supported by NSF Grants BNS 77-24903 to M. Kreithen and W. T. Keeton and BNS 84-18779 to M. Kreithen, and by NIH Grant ROI NS22581-o2 to M. Kreithen. We thank Marian M. Kreithen for critical reading of the manuscript. Address reprint requests to M.

The determination of direction in landmark-based spatial search in pigeons: A further test of the vector sum model

“…These unmanipulated cues include the geometry of the room at large, notable features in the room (such as the observation window/door), magnetic cues, and inertial cues. It has been shown that birds use inertial cues (von St. Paul, 1982) and perhaps magnetic cues (Keeton, 1974), although the use of magnetic cues in laboratory settings has not been found (Alsop, 1987;Carman, Walker, & Lee, 1987;McIsaac & Kreithen, 1987;Moore, Stanhope, & Wilcox, 1987). Rats show evidence of using global geometry in determining direction (Cheng, 1986;Margules & Gallistel, 1988).…”

Conditioning analysis of magnetoreception in honeybees

“…For example, yellowfin tuna have discriminated the presence and absence of radial magnetic intensity gradients readily but have failed to discriminate between fields containing radial intensity gradients differing only in sign [Walker, 19841. Magnetic conditioning experiments with homing pigeons have involved a variety of static and time-varying stimuli, but almost always with stationary animals and negative results [Kreithen and Keeton, 1974;Beaugrand 1976;Meyer and Lambe, 1966;Alsop, 1987;Moore et al, 19871. The results of one experiment in which pigeons that fluttered in a flight tunnel before entering one of two goal boxes discriminated the presence and absence of a uniform magnetic field in the tunnel could not be reproduced [Carman et al, 19871. Other conditioning experiments in which homing pigeons were required to fly, but in which the stimuli used did not contain different patterns of intensity variation in space, also have been unsuccessful [McIsaac and Kreithen, 1987;Carman et al, 19871. Two apparent exceptions to the hypothesis come from experiments with elasmobranchs by Kalmijn [ 19811 and with newts by Phillips [ 19771. In those experiments, Helmholtz coils were used to change the direction of the geomagnetic field, with the coils either on or off during trials.…”

Pigeons fail to detect low-frequency magnetic fields

“…It now includes absolute failures to demonstrate magnetic sensitivity in studies involving four sorts of reinforcers (food, water, shock, and shock avoidance) and five responses (heart rate, pecking, drinking movements, walking, and flying) (Alsop, 1987;Beaugrand, 1976Beaugrand, , 1977Cannan et al, 1987;Delius & Emmerton, 1978;Griffin, 1982;Kreithen & Keeton, 1974;McIsaac & Kreithen, 1987;Meyer & Lambe, 1966;Orgel & Smith, 1954). A great many other negative studies have remained unpublished (see Alsop, 1987;Bookman, 1977;Delius & Emmerton, 1978;McIsaac & Kreithen, 1987;Neville, 1955). Although there is no doubt that pigeons find it difficult to form certain unnatural associations (Moore, 1973), we know of no case in which a proven exteroceptive sensitivity has remained impossible to demonstrate clearly with conditioning techniques.…”

“…The more recent literature, however, has been mixed. Studies employing conditioning (psychophysical) techniques have continued to give primarily negative results (Alsop, 1987;Beaugrand, 1976Beaugrand, , 1977Carman, Walker, & Lee, 1987;Delius & Emmerton, 1978;Griffin, 1982;Kreithen & Keeton, 1974;McIsaac & Kreithen, 1987; see also Meyer & Lambe, 1966;Neville, 1955;Orgel & Smith, 1954;cf. Bookman, 1977;Reille, 1968).…”