iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.
iBet uBet web content aggregator. Adding the entire web to your favor.



Link to original content: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37703235
Observational spatial memory in wolves and dogs - PubMed Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Sep 13;18(9):e0290547.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290547. eCollection 2023.

Observational spatial memory in wolves and dogs

Sebastian G Vetter  1 , Louise Rangheard  1 , Lena Schaidl  1 , Kurt Kotrschal  2 , Friederike Range  1
Affiliations

Observational spatial memory in wolves and dogs

Sebastian G Vetter et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Social learning is highly adaptive in transmitting essential information between individuals in many species. While several mechanisms have been observed, less is known about how much animals can remember. However, results on observational spatial memory among caching species, i.e. a form of social learning allowing individuals to remember and pilfer food caches made by others, suggest that this ability correlates with their social organization. Both wolves and their domesticated form, dogs, are social species known to make food caches, and previous studies have shown that they both can use observational spatial memory abilities to find hidden food. In order to test how much socially transmitted information wolves and dogs can remember, we tested both species in a task requiring them to find 4, 6 or 8 caches after they observed a human hiding food items, or after a control condition where they could not observe the hiding. We found that both wolves and dogs retrieved more caches and were more efficient for the first few caches if they observed the hiding than in the control condition, suggesting that they did not simply rely on scent to find the rewards. Interestingly, wolves outperformed dogs irrespective of whether the caching could be observed or not. We suggest that this result is due to a difference in motivation/persistence between wolves and dogs rather than observational spatial memory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No authors have competing interests.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Outline of experimental site of 2013/2014.
a) Testing enclosure; b) Shifting system; c) Compartment of the shifting system used during control trials; d) 2-door entrance for humans.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Partial effects plot of the interactive effect of the number of caches made and the trial number (i.e., number of repeats performed in a certain experimental setting) on the number of unrecovered caches.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Partial effects plot of the interactive effect of condition and retrieval order of successfully recovered caches on the latency to retrieve a single cache (red = test, blue = control).
Grey areas show standard errors of the regression line.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Partial effects plot of the interactive effect of species and the number of caches made on the latency to retrieve a single cache (brown = dogs, black = wolves).
Grey areas show standard errors of the regression line.
Fig 5
Fig 5. Partial effects plot of the interactive effect of the number of caches made and the trial number (i.e., number of repeats performed in a certain experimental setting) on the latency to retrieve a single cache.
Fig 6
Fig 6. Partial effects plot of the interactive effect of species and the number of caches made on the distance travelled to retrieve a single cache (brown = dogs, black = wolves).
Grey areas show standard errors of the regression line.
Fig 7
Fig 7. Partial effects plot of the interactive effect of condition and the retrieval order on the distance travelled to retrieve a single cache (red = test, blue = control).
Grey areas show standard errors of the regression line.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Heyes CM. Social learning in animals: categories and mechanisms. Biological Reviews. 1994;69(2):207–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1994.tb01506.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chapman TL, Holcomb MP, Spivey KL, Sehr EK, Gall BG. A Test of Local Enhancement in Amphibians. Ethology. 2015;121(3):308–14. Available from: 10.1111/eth.12337 - DOI
    1. Mersmann D, Tomasello M, Call J, Kaminski J, Taborsky M. Simple Mechanisms Can Explain Social Learning in Domestic Dogs (Canis familiaris). Ethology. 2011;117(8):675–90. Available from: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2011.01919.x - DOI
    1. Slagsvold T, Wiebe KL. Social learning in birds and its role in shaping a foraging niche. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2011;366(1567):969–77. Available from: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0343 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Thornton A, Clutton-Brock T. Social learning and the development of individual and group behaviour in mammal societies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2011;366(1567):978–87. Available from: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0312 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Grants and funding

This study was partly supported by the Austrian Science Fund (Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung, FWF), grant number P 33928-B. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.