Rufous hummingbirds' memory for flower location
We used an open-field analogue of the eight-arm radial maze to investigate the role of memory during foraging by rufous hummingbirds, Selasphorus rufus. In experiment 1 we attempted to determine whether birds were able to differentiate between flowers of the same type that they had emptied, flowers...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Animal behaviour 2001-05, Vol.61 (5), p.981-986 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 986 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 981 |
container_title | Animal behaviour |
container_volume | 61 |
creator | Henderson, Jonathan Hurly, T.Andrew Healy, Susan D. |
description | We used an open-field analogue of the eight-arm radial maze to investigate the role of memory during foraging by rufous hummingbirds, Selasphorus rufus. In experiment 1 we attempted to determine whether birds were able to differentiate between flowers of the same type that they had emptied, flowers they had seen but not visited and new flowers. They were tested with three trial types, all of which involved birds visiting four rewarded flowers in the first phase of a trial. In ‘free’ trials, the bird was allowed to choose four from eight flowers. In ‘forced’ trials there were only four flowers available in phase 1 and in ‘mixed’ trials the bird could choose four from six available flowers. In all trial types eight flowers (including all those in the same locations as in phase 1) were presented to the bird on its return in phase 2. The four rewarded flowers were those not visited in phase 1. In free and mixed trials, birds were better than chance at avoiding the flowers they had emptied in phase 1. In mixed trials, birds were more likely to visit the new flowers that were unique to phase 2. In experiment 2 we tested whether flower height was a floral feature remembered by birds. Birds were given forced and free trials in which the flowers in the radial maze were presented at two heights. As performance in both trial types was better than chance we suggest that hummingbirds use flower height to remember the locations of flowers. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1006/anbe.2000.1670 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17891507</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0003347200916701</els_id><sourcerecordid>75390382</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-f7544c24856ae875cc7e5d77528976035208a0620b466fab5c3a045897d856db3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMouK5ePRcRPXU3TTpJehTxCxYE0XNI00SztM2atMr-e1N2QRA8DTN53snwIHRe4EWBMVuqvjYLgnFqGccHaFbgCnJBBDlEszSmOS05OUYnMa5TywDDDC1fRuvHmH2MXef699qFJl5nnel82GbWh8y2_tuErPVaDc73p-jIqjaas32do7f7u9fbx3z1_PB0e7PKNeV0yC2HstSkFMCUERy05gYazoGIijNMgWChMCO4LhmzqgZNFS4hPTYp0tR0jq52ezfBf44mDrJzUZu2Vb1J98qCi6oAzBN48Qdc-zH06TZJSAnAKIcELXaQDj7GYKzcBNepsJUFlpM8OcmTkzw5yUuBy_1WFbVqbVC9dvE3VVBSQZUwscNMUvHlTJBRO9Nr07hg9CAb7_774QcbY3-2</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>224556375</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rufous hummingbirds' memory for flower location</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Henderson, Jonathan ; Hurly, T.Andrew ; Healy, Susan D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Henderson, Jonathan ; Hurly, T.Andrew ; Healy, Susan D.</creatorcontrib><description>We used an open-field analogue of the eight-arm radial maze to investigate the role of memory during foraging by rufous hummingbirds, Selasphorus rufus. In experiment 1 we attempted to determine whether birds were able to differentiate between flowers of the same type that they had emptied, flowers they had seen but not visited and new flowers. They were tested with three trial types, all of which involved birds visiting four rewarded flowers in the first phase of a trial. In ‘free’ trials, the bird was allowed to choose four from eight flowers. In ‘forced’ trials there were only four flowers available in phase 1 and in ‘mixed’ trials the bird could choose four from six available flowers. In all trial types eight flowers (including all those in the same locations as in phase 1) were presented to the bird on its return in phase 2. The four rewarded flowers were those not visited in phase 1. In free and mixed trials, birds were better than chance at avoiding the flowers they had emptied in phase 1. In mixed trials, birds were more likely to visit the new flowers that were unique to phase 2. In experiment 2 we tested whether flower height was a floral feature remembered by birds. Birds were given forced and free trials in which the flowers in the radial maze were presented at two heights. As performance in both trial types was better than chance we suggest that hummingbirds use flower height to remember the locations of flowers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-3472</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8282</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1006/anbe.2000.1670</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ANBEA8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kent: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Animal behavior ; Animal ethology ; Aves ; Biological and medical sciences ; Birds ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Memory ; Plant location ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Selasphorus rufus ; Vertebrata</subject><ispartof>Animal behaviour, 2001-05, Vol.61 (5), p.981-986</ispartof><rights>2001 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour</rights><rights>2001 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Ltd. May 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-f7544c24856ae875cc7e5d77528976035208a0620b466fab5c3a045897d856db3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-f7544c24856ae875cc7e5d77528976035208a0620b466fab5c3a045897d856db3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2000.1670$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1132959$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Henderson, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hurly, T.Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Healy, Susan D.</creatorcontrib><title>Rufous hummingbirds' memory for flower location</title><title>Animal behaviour</title><description>We used an open-field analogue of the eight-arm radial maze to investigate the role of memory during foraging by rufous hummingbirds, Selasphorus rufus. In experiment 1 we attempted to determine whether birds were able to differentiate between flowers of the same type that they had emptied, flowers they had seen but not visited and new flowers. They were tested with three trial types, all of which involved birds visiting four rewarded flowers in the first phase of a trial. In ‘free’ trials, the bird was allowed to choose four from eight flowers. In ‘forced’ trials there were only four flowers available in phase 1 and in ‘mixed’ trials the bird could choose four from six available flowers. In all trial types eight flowers (including all those in the same locations as in phase 1) were presented to the bird on its return in phase 2. The four rewarded flowers were those not visited in phase 1. In free and mixed trials, birds were better than chance at avoiding the flowers they had emptied in phase 1. In mixed trials, birds were more likely to visit the new flowers that were unique to phase 2. In experiment 2 we tested whether flower height was a floral feature remembered by birds. Birds were given forced and free trials in which the flowers in the radial maze were presented at two heights. As performance in both trial types was better than chance we suggest that hummingbirds use flower height to remember the locations of flowers.</description><subject>Animal behavior</subject><subject>Animal ethology</subject><subject>Aves</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Plant location</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Selasphorus rufus</subject><subject>Vertebrata</subject><issn>0003-3472</issn><issn>1095-8282</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMouK5ePRcRPXU3TTpJehTxCxYE0XNI00SztM2atMr-e1N2QRA8DTN53snwIHRe4EWBMVuqvjYLgnFqGccHaFbgCnJBBDlEszSmOS05OUYnMa5TywDDDC1fRuvHmH2MXef699qFJl5nnel82GbWh8y2_tuErPVaDc73p-jIqjaas32do7f7u9fbx3z1_PB0e7PKNeV0yC2HstSkFMCUERy05gYazoGIijNMgWChMCO4LhmzqgZNFS4hPTYp0tR0jq52ezfBf44mDrJzUZu2Vb1J98qCi6oAzBN48Qdc-zH06TZJSAnAKIcELXaQDj7GYKzcBNepsJUFlpM8OcmTkzw5yUuBy_1WFbVqbVC9dvE3VVBSQZUwscNMUvHlTJBRO9Nr07hg9CAb7_774QcbY3-2</recordid><startdate>20010501</startdate><enddate>20010501</enddate><creator>Henderson, Jonathan</creator><creator>Hurly, T.Andrew</creator><creator>Healy, Susan D.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Ltd</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20010501</creationdate><title>Rufous hummingbirds' memory for flower location</title><author>Henderson, Jonathan ; Hurly, T.Andrew ; Healy, Susan D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-f7544c24856ae875cc7e5d77528976035208a0620b466fab5c3a045897d856db3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Animal behavior</topic><topic>Animal ethology</topic><topic>Aves</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Plant location</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Selasphorus rufus</topic><topic>Vertebrata</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Henderson, Jonathan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hurly, T.Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Healy, Susan D.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Animal behaviour</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Henderson, Jonathan</au><au>Hurly, T.Andrew</au><au>Healy, Susan D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rufous hummingbirds' memory for flower location</atitle><jtitle>Animal behaviour</jtitle><date>2001-05-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>981</spage><epage>986</epage><pages>981-986</pages><issn>0003-3472</issn><eissn>1095-8282</eissn><coden>ANBEA8</coden><abstract>We used an open-field analogue of the eight-arm radial maze to investigate the role of memory during foraging by rufous hummingbirds, Selasphorus rufus. In experiment 1 we attempted to determine whether birds were able to differentiate between flowers of the same type that they had emptied, flowers they had seen but not visited and new flowers. They were tested with three trial types, all of which involved birds visiting four rewarded flowers in the first phase of a trial. In ‘free’ trials, the bird was allowed to choose four from eight flowers. In ‘forced’ trials there were only four flowers available in phase 1 and in ‘mixed’ trials the bird could choose four from six available flowers. In all trial types eight flowers (including all those in the same locations as in phase 1) were presented to the bird on its return in phase 2. The four rewarded flowers were those not visited in phase 1. In free and mixed trials, birds were better than chance at avoiding the flowers they had emptied in phase 1. In mixed trials, birds were more likely to visit the new flowers that were unique to phase 2. In experiment 2 we tested whether flower height was a floral feature remembered by birds. Birds were given forced and free trials in which the flowers in the radial maze were presented at two heights. As performance in both trial types was better than chance we suggest that hummingbirds use flower height to remember the locations of flowers.</abstract><cop>Kent</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1006/anbe.2000.1670</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-3472 |
ispartof | Animal behaviour, 2001-05, Vol.61 (5), p.981-986 |
issn | 0003-3472 1095-8282 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17891507 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
subjects | Animal behavior Animal ethology Aves Biological and medical sciences Birds Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Memory Plant location Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Selasphorus rufus Vertebrata |
title | Rufous hummingbirds' memory for flower location |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T14%3A03%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rufous%20hummingbirds'%20memory%20for%20flower%20location&rft.jtitle=Animal%20behaviour&rft.au=Henderson,%20Jonathan&rft.date=2001-05-01&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=981&rft.epage=986&rft.pages=981-986&rft.issn=0003-3472&rft.eissn=1095-8282&rft.coden=ANBEA8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1006/anbe.2000.1670&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E75390382%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=224556375&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0003347200916701&rfr_iscdi=true |