Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorPritchard, David James
dc.contributor.authorHurly, T. Andrew
dc.contributor.authorHealy, Susan Denise
dc.date.accessioned2016-07-21T23:31:00Z
dc.date.available2016-07-21T23:31:00Z
dc.date.issued2015-07
dc.identifier207143634
dc.identifier0439c745-dc85-49bc-a65d-9c99a64ecfdf
dc.identifier84944355471
dc.identifier000362960200008
dc.identifier.citationPritchard , D J , Hurly , T A & Healy , S D 2015 , ' Effects of landmark distance and stability on accuracy of reward relocation ' , Animal Cognition , vol. 18 , no. 6 , pp. 1285-1297 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-015-0896-7en
dc.identifier.issn1435-9448
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-8059-4480/work/60631255
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/9192
dc.descriptionThis work was supported by the University of St Andrews, the University of Lethbridge and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada.en
dc.description.abstractAlthough small-scale navigation is well studied in a wide range of species, much of what is known about landmark use by vertebrates is based on laboratory experiments. To investigate how vertebrates in the wild use landmarks, we trained wild male rufous hummingbirds to feed from a flower that was placed in a constant spatial relationship with two artificial landmarks. In the first experiment, the landmarks and flower were 0.25, 0.5 or 1 m apart and we always moved them 3–4 m after each visit by the bird. In the second experiment, the landmarks and flower were always 0.25 m apart and we moved them either 1 or 0.25 m between trials. In tests, in which we removed the flower, the hummingbirds stopped closer to the predicted flower location when the landmarks had been closer to the flower during training. However, while the distance that the birds stopped from the landmarks and predicted flower location was unaffected by the distance that the landmarks moved between trials, the birds directed their search nearer to the predicted direction of the flower, relative to the landmarks, when the landmarks and flower were more stable in the environment. In the field, then, landmarks alone were sufficient for the birds to determine the distance of a reward but not its direction.
dc.format.extent13
dc.format.extent463014
dc.format.extent591397
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofAnimal Cognitionen
dc.subjectNavigationen
dc.subjectLandmarksen
dc.subjectSpatial memoryen
dc.subjectSpatial cognitionen
dc.subjectOrientationen
dc.subjectHummingbirdsen
dc.subjectQH301 Biologyen
dc.subjectQL Zoologyen
dc.subject.lccQH301en
dc.subject.lccQLen
dc.titleEffects of landmark distance and stability on accuracy of reward relocationen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Biologyen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Institute of Behavioural and Neural Sciencesen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Centre for Social Learning & Cognitive Evolutionen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Centre for Biological Diversityen
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10071-015-0896-7
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.date.embargoedUntil2016-07-22
dc.identifier.urlhttp://link.springer.com/content/esm/art:10.1007/s10071-015-0896-7/file/MediaObjects/10071_2015_896_MOESM1_ESM.docxen


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record