Tool use and tooling in ravens (<i>Corvus corax</i>): A review and novel observations

Jacobs, Ivo; Osvath, Mathias

doi:10.1111/eth.13352

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 65 publications

(146 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Presumptive tool use in Northern ravens was reported as early as 1987 [62] and has been described in laboratory-based experiments more recently, in which ravens displayed future planning and tool use at a level of proficiency seen in apes, suggesting an evolutionary cognitive pathway for these behaviours [63]. A recent review of tool use and tooling in ravens by Jacobs and Osvath [64] identified 11 modes of tool use with specific tool use (such as twigs, stones and pinecones) in 10 sub-modes. Other sub-modes identified the use of water to soak foodstuff, the exchange of tokens with conspecifics and placing food within an object, such as a piece of cloth, and folding it over.…”

Section: Can Perforation Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Identification of Novel Can Manipulation Behaviour in the Common Raven (Corvus corax)

Dickinson,

Loftus

2024

Birds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the common raven (Corvus corax) population on Lanzarote, Spain, at a previously unstudied site. The study aimed to compare the use of camera trap technology and human observation in capturing a wide repertoire of raven behaviour and pay close attention to the perforation of aluminium cans, a behaviour that has not been described in the scientific literature previously but has been reported anecdotally through human observation. Five cameras were sited over a period of 6 months, with three aluminium cans placed at each location. One of the three cans was baited with meat and eggs, mimicking wild feeding substrate. Human observations took place over the same period of time in the same locations. Raven sightings were highly correlated in human-inhabited areas as well as agricultural areas, seemingly linked to food acquisition. Camera trap technology identified a greater number of can-orientated behaviours (interaction, manipulation, peeking inside, and pecking) compared to the human observation method. Conversely, human observation yielded a greater number of non-can-orientated behaviours (analysed as a group) when compared to that of camera trap observation. Overall, there was a significantly greater number of ravens observed via human observation when compared to that of camera trap observation. Initial evidence suggests that ravens only perforate cans they deem salient in terms of food acquisition, with beer cans being the most common focus of the behaviours observed, possibly linked to olfactory stimuli, the movement of the can or learned behaviour relating to reward acquisition. This study presents new data regarding object interaction in ravens, adding to the current body of knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Can Perforation Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 96%

Identification of Novel Can Manipulation Behaviour in the Common Raven (Corvus corax)

Dickinson,

Loftus

2024

Birds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ravens are capable of planning for tool use (throwing a rock into a transparent tube to get bait off a rocking platform) and bartering with delays of up to 17 h (Kabadayi and Osvath 2017 ). Although ravens' tool use in the wild may be more common than widely perceived (Jacobs and Osvath 2023 ). Thus, non-tool-using species can often display comparable cognitive abilities to tool-users on tool-related tasks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hooded crows (Corvus cornix) manufacture objects relative to a mental template

Smirnova,

Bulgakova,

Cheplakova

et al. 2024

Anim Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It was recently found that not only tool-specialized New Caledonian crows, but also Goffin cockatoos can manufacture physical objects in accordance with a mental template. That is, they can emulate features of existing objects when they manufacture new items. Both species spontaneously ripped pieces of card into large strips if they had previously learned that a large template was rewarded, and small strips when they previously learned that a small template was rewarded. Among New Caledonian crows, this cognitive ability was suggested as a potential mechanism underlying the transmission of natural tool designs. Here, we tested for the same ability in another non-specialised tool user–Hooded crows (Corvus cornix). Crows were exposed to pre-made template objects, varying first in colour and then in size, and were rewarded only if they chose pre-made objects that matched the template. In subsequent tests, birds were given the opportunity to manufacture versions of these objects. All three crows ripped paper pieces from the same colour material as the rewarded template, and, crucially, also manufactured objects that were more similar in size to previously rewarded, than unrewarded, templates, despite the birds being rewarded at random in both tests. Therefore, we found the ability to manufacture physical objects relative to a mental template in yet another bird species not specialized in using or making foraging tools in the wild, but with a high level of brain and cognitive development.

show abstract

“…Perhaps particularly interesting is the observation of such capacities in birds, whose brain anatomy is distinctly different from that of mammals [1,2]. At least some birds are innovative tool manufacturers [3] and users [4] who can plan for the future [5][6][7] and engage in causal reasoning [8]. Others show remarkable long-term memory capacity [9][10][11][12], inference [10], episodic-like memory [11], and striking regularity in how they use past experience to navigate novel present conditions [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not bird-brained: Chickens use prior experience to solve novel timing problems

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite differences between bird and human brain anatomy, birds have recently demonstrated capacities thought to be uniquely human, including planning and problem-solving. Many avian demonstrations of ‘complex’ behaviors rely on species-specific behavior (e.g., caching, tool use), or use birds who have evolved largely in similarly undomesticated circumstances (e.g., pigeons). In the present experiment, we asked how a species domesticated thousands of years ago, chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus), used past experience to navigate novel problems in the double-bisection task. The double-bisection task which has been used extensively with pigeons, allowing a comparison of signatures of chicken and pigeon performance on the same task. Our findings revealed chickens, like pigeons, show flexible learning that is sensitive to the broader context in which events occur. Further, as with pigeons, our chickens’ patterns of performance could be divided into two distinct categories which may reflect differences in the specific behaviors in which organisms engage during a timing task. Our findings demonstrate remarkable similarity in how chickens and pigeons use past experience to navigate novel problems. Further, these findings add to a growing body of knowledge suggesting the simplest forms of learning common across species–operant and respondent conditioning–are more flexible than is typically assumed.

show abstract

Tool use and tooling in ravens (Corvus corax): A review and novel observations

Cited by 5 publications

References 65 publications

Identification of Novel Can Manipulation Behaviour in the Common Raven (Corvus corax)

Identification of Novel Can Manipulation Behaviour in the Common Raven (Corvus corax)

Hooded crows (Corvus cornix) manufacture objects relative to a mental template

Not bird-brained: Chickens use prior experience to solve novel timing problems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About