A comparison of innovative problem-solving abilities between wild and captive spotted hyaenas, Crocuta crocuta
Highlights
► Research on animal problem solving seldom considers both wild and captive animals. ► We presented wild and captive spotted hyaenas with the same novel technical problem. ► Captives were better than wild hyaenas at solving the problem. ► Captives showed more diverse exploratory behaviour and were less neophobic. ► Captive studies of animal innovation may suffer from low external validity.
Section snippets
Subjects and Study Site
Wild subjects were 62 spotted hyaenas from two neighbouring clans in the Masai Mara National Reserve, Kenya. Benson-Amram & Holekamp (2012) provide complete details on the identification of individual hyaenas, assignment to rank, sex and age categories, and methods used to assess problem-solving success, neophobia, exploration diversity and persistence among wild hyaenas.
Experiments in captivity were conducted on members of a breeding colony at the Field Station for Behavioral Research (FSBR)
Results
We found no difference in success (, P = 0.11), exploration diversity (F1,16 = 0.060, P = 0.81), neophobia (F1,17 = 4.0, P < 0.062) or persistence (F1,17 = 2.82, P = 0.11) between captive hyaenas that observed a conspecific open the box and those that did not. Thus, watching another hyaena solve the problem did not improve performance. There was no effect of previous experience in a cooperative problem-solving experiment or hormone treatment group on success (experience: , P = 0.20; hormone:
Discussion
Demonstrating that a captive animal can solve a novel problem shows us that a species has the capability to innovate in that domain. Our results confirm, however, that captive studies tell us little about whether individuals from the same species would regularly show, or benefit from, innovative behaviour in the wild. As predicted, we found a striking difference in the percentage of captive and wild hyaenas that were able to solve a novel technical problem, even when members of both populations
Acknowledgments
The research presented here was described in Animal Research Application No. 07/08-099-00, approved most recently on 4 June 2010 by the All University Committee on Animal Use and Care at Michigan State University. The experimental procedures for the captive study were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of the University of California, Berkeley. This work was supported by National Science Foundation grants IOB0618022, IOS0819437, and IOS1121474. Michigan State University
References (57)
- et al.
The origin and spread of innovations in starlings
Animal Behaviour
(2008) - et al.
Individual variation in spontaneous problem-solving performance among wild great tits
Animal Behaviour
(2011) - et al.
Cooperative problem solving in a social carnivore
Animal Behaviour
(2009) Social organization of the spotted hyaena Crocuta crocuta. II. Dominance and reproduction
Animal Behaviour
(1986)- et al.
Foraging innovation in the guppy
Animal Behaviour
(1999) - et al.
Feeding innovations and forebrain size in birds
Animal Behaviour
(1997) - et al.
Behavioural flexibility predicts species richness in birds, but not extinction risk
Animal Behaviour
(2003) - et al.
Innovative foraging behaviour in birds: what characterizes an innovator?
Behavioural Processes
(2011) Clever animals and killjoy explanations in comparative psychology
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2010)- et al.
Consumer and motor innovation in the common myna: the role of motivation and emotional responses
Animal Behaviour
(2012)
Innovative problem solving in wild meerkats
Animal Behaviour
Problem solving and neophobia in a columbiform–passeriform assemblage in Barbados
Animal Behaviour
A study of problem solving by gibbons
Behaviour
Innovative problem solving by wild spotted hyenas
Proceedings of the Royal Society B
Comparing responses to novel objects in wild baboons (Papio ursinus) and geladas (Theropithecus gelada)
Animal Cognition
Cultural innovation and transmission of tool use in wild chimpanzees: evidence from field experiments
Animal Cognition
Serial reversal learning and the evolution of behavioral flexibility in three species of North American corvids (Gymnorhinus cyanocephalus, Nucifraga columbiana, Aphelocoma californica)
Journal of Comparative Psychology
Social learning and innovation are positively correlated in pigeons (Columba livia)
Animal Cognition
The effect of humans on the cognitive development of apes
Androgens and masculinization of genitalia in the spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta). 2. Effects of prenatal anti-androgens
Journal of Reproduction and Fertility
Responses to olfactory stimuli in spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta): I. Investigation of environmental odors and the function of rolling
Journal of Comparative Psychology
Male spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) queue for status in social groups dominated by females
Behavioral Ecology
Ontogeny of female dominance in the spotted hyaena: perspectives from nature and captivity
Symposia of Zoological Society of London
Testing social learning in a wild mountain parrot, the kea (Nestor notabilis)
Learning & Behavior
Androstenedione may organize or activate sex-reversed traits in female spotted hyenas
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A.
Hormonal correlates of masculinization in female spotted hyaenas (Crocuta crocuta). 1. Infancy to sexual maturity
Reproduction
The role of neophobia in determining the degree of foraging specialization in some migrant warblers
American Naturalist
The role of neophobia and neophilia in the development of innovative behaviour of birds
Cited by (102)
Numerical cognition in black-handed spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi)
2022, Behavioural ProcessesExploring innovative problem-solving in African lions (Panthera leo) and snow leopards (Panthera uncia)
2022, Behavioural ProcessesCitation Excerpt :Animals’ ability to innovate has been linked to several behavioral mechanisms (reviewed by Tebbich et al., 2016): (1) Exploration Diversity, e.g., the number of different task-directed behaviors (Benson-Amram and Holekamp, 2012; Sol et al., 2011), (2) Neophobia, e.g., fear of novelty or unfamiliar items (Berlyne, 1950; Webster and Lefebvre, 2001), (3) Persistence, e.g., task-directed motivation and working time (Biondi et al., 2010; Lefebvre et al., 2004) and (4) behavioral flexibility, e.g., an individual’s ability to change their behavior in response to environmental feedback and to inhibit previously successful behavior (Griffin and Guez, 2014; Lea et al., 2020). For example, there is an overall trend between innovative problem-solving, high Exploration Diversity, high Persistence, and low Neophobia (e.g., birds: Bókony et al., 2014; Boogert et al., 2008; mammals: Benson-Amram, Weldele, and Holekamp, 2013; Kendal et al., 2005; Thornton and Samson, 2012; reptiles: Leal and Powell, 2012; Manrod et al., 2008; fish: Kuba et al., 2010; Mair, Lucon-Xiccato, and Bisazza, 2021). Animals’ cognitive abilities and the behaviors underpinning these abilities have potentially important fitness consequences; innovation has been linked to species’ ability to exploit novel resources, adapt to a changing environment, or use resources within their environment more efficiently (Dukas, 2004; Mehrkam, 2019; Sol et al., 2013).