Geniuses everywhere

I’ve recently seen two programs on TV, “Ape Genius” and “Dog Genius” that examine animal intelligence and compare it with human capabilities. 

Check out this National Geographic video about a dog and his peculiar habits.

An article in Animal Cognition details and experiment conducted at the University of Vienna to investigate the performance of different species

 The ability to reason by exclusion (which is defined as the selection of the correct alternative by logically excluding other potential alternatives; Call in Anim Cogn 9:393–403 2006) is well established in humans. Several studies have found it to be present in some nonhuman species as well, whereas it seems to be somewhat limited or even absent in others. As inconsistent methodology might have contributed to the revealed inter-species differences, we examined reasoning by exclusion in pigeons (n = 6), dogs (n = 6), students (n = 6), and children (n = 8) under almost equal experimental conditions. After being trained in a computer-controlled two-choice procedure to discriminate between four positive (S+) and four negative (S?) photographs, the subjects were tested with displays consisting of one S? and one of four novel stimuli (S?). One pigeon, half of the dogs and almost all humans preferred S? over S?, thereby choosing either by novelty, or by avoiding S? without acquiring any knowledge about S?, or by inferring positive class membership of S? by excluding S?. To decide among these strategies the subjects that showed a preference for S? were then tested with displays consisting of one of the S? and one of four novel stimuli (S??). Although the pigeon preferentially chose the S?? and by novelty, dogs and humans maintained their preference for S?, thereby showing evidence of reasoning by exclusion. Taken together, the results of the present study suggest that none of the pigeons, but half of the dogs and almost all humans inferred positive class membership of S? by logically excluding S?.

Man vs Ape - social complexities

An interview with Rebecca Saxe, a cognitive scientist at MIT, sheds light on   humans’ unique ability to teach and interest passing along cultural knowledge and how it compares with other social animals.

Q: Is it true that there might be a brain region dedicated to this coordinating of two minds?

Saxe: Well, what we do know is that there are definitely regions in the human brain that seem to play special roles in social cognition—in seeing and thinking about other people. And different parts of your brain get involved in coordinating and reasoning about different kinds of social tasks. It appears that this kind of cooperation recruits a very specific part of your brain, right behind the middle of your forehead.

In the last five years, there’s been a huge explosion of research with new tools, new imaging tools, that make it possible to study the living, thinking human brain. And that’s allowed us to study the brain basis of all kinds of things that are uniquely human.

Novel ways elephants communicate

photo courtesy of  Greg George

It is believed that elephants use low frequency signals transmitted through the ground as a means of communication.  A current theory is that elephants are able to sense the vibrations through pressure-sensitive nerve endings, Pacinian corpuscles, in their feet and —Meissner’s corpuscles that detect infrasonic vibrations - in the tip of their trunks.

 Scientists Katy Payne, Joyce Poole and their colleagues discovered that elephants emit a variety of infrasounds—calls too low in pitch to be heard by most humans. In 1989, Payne and her colleagues conducted a landmark experiment at a waterhole in Etosha demonstrating that these powerful infrasonic rumbles contain specific messages that can be heard and understood by other elephants more than 2 miles away.

This article contains information on the progression of seismic communication research in elephants and evidence supporting the idea that elephants use low frequency signals to communicate a variety of information from predator warnings to reproductive cues.

Animal testing

The morality and usefulness of animal testing is a hotly debated issue with a lot of misinformation being offered as fact along the way.  

However, one advantage of the debate is increased accountability and oversight of researchers who use animals.  By and large, most researchers  recognize that animals should be cared for humanely and aim to provide the best care for the animals used in their research. 

Another advantage is increased resources devoted to developing effective alternatives to animal testing, like computer modeling.

“The EPA and the National Institutes of Health announced a toxicity testing agreement that will allow the EPA to use NIH Chemical Genomics Center’s high-speed, automated screening robots to test suspected toxic compounds, using cells and isolated molecular targets instead of laboratory animals, the EPA said Thursday in a release,” according to a United Press International article on Friday

This is not to say that animal testing should be abandoned altogether.  Research using animals has provided many significant medical advancements, vaccines for example. With all the recent advancements in technology, it is a good idea to consider how research using animals could be refined or replaced when practical.

DNA sequencing for eels

It should come as no surprise to anyone that research using animals has generated a wealth of knowledge used to better understand human biology and behavior and improve medical treatments. It may be shocking to learn that biologists are hoping electric eels will provide insight into the human nervous system.

This article on the journal Nature’s Web site explains why researchers are asking for the DNA of eels to be thoroughly sequenced by sequencers who have already completed similar studies on mice and chimps.

One of the things that sequencing the E. electricus genome could lead to, is advances in treatments for spinal injuries, the researchers say. The fish have developed an amazing ability to regenerate, possibly as a result of often having their tails bitten off by electro-sensing predatory catfish, says Albert.

“You can cut off the back third of the body and they will regenerate everything, including the spinal cord,” says Albert.

It will be interesting to see what is learned from this type of research using animals as models.

Tropical birds living in Chicago

photo courtesy of Eloise Mason

Trudging along the snow-covered streets of Hyde Park, you hear chirping and screeching resembling the sound of Styrofoam pieces rubbing together.  You look up and see a bright green and blue parakeet.  You may think that all the cold and snow has finally made you go mad, but there really are tropical birds that have colonized on the South Side of Chicago. They are called monk parakeets.

These birds have been living in Hyde Park for more than 30 years. No one knows exactly how the wild parakeets arrived in Chicago, but it seems they are here to stay.

Mark Spreyer, a biologist who directs the Stillman Nature Center in South Barrington, has written about the monk parakeet and led tours for people interested in seeing the exotic birds.  He told Parrot Chronicles the monk parakeets ”chose the right place to put up a colony. Everyone there really likes them. It’s a really diverse neighborhood and I think there’s a kind of multiculturalism connection between the people and the birds. They fascinate people,” he said.

Stephen Pruett-Jones, associate professor of ecology and evolution at the University of Chicago, will give a lecture on the exotic birds who have settled in Hyde Park.  The impact of these non-native birds on other bird species, the environment and the community is the topic of Pruett-Jones’ lecture at noon on Feb. 20. 

Roughly one foot long, the monk parakeet is a very social and gregarious bird. The plume of green feathers on the bird’s head and neck inspired its scientific name, myiopsitta monachus, because its hood of feathers resembles a monk’s hood, according to the Houston Audubon Society. 

Pruett-Jones has been observing these birds for more than 15 years, and is generating a map of monk parakeet nests in Chicago and the surrounding areas including northwest Indiana and southern Wisconsin, with help from undergraduate students and local inhabitants’ sightings.

Experiments conducted in aviaries with captive birds have found the large nests provide a four-degree advantage over outside temperatures, so it is slightly warmer in the nests.  However, “if that was the only thing they had going for them, they could not survive the winters.  They only survive the winters because they have access to a large good-quality food source,” in birdfeeders, said Pruett-Jones. 

“I think this winter will probably slow them up,” said Spreyer.  The thick snow cover could make it harder to find food, and may “knock their numbers back a bit,” he said. Pruett-Jones estimates the number in Hyde Park at about 200.

The birds are of some concern for utility companies in Illinois.  Monk parakeets occasionally build their nests on utility poles and power transformers, which can ignite fires and cause power outages. 

The lecture will be in the Swift common room at the University of Chicago in Hyde Park.  Admission is $5 at the door, and includes a vegetarian meal. Reserve a place before Tuesday at noon by contacting divinitylunch@gmail.com

A day in the life of a polar bear

The Polar Bear International Web site allows you to track polar bears that have been collared, including around the Chuckchi Sea.  It is an awesome tool!

Data is provided to the site by the the U.S. Geological Survey Alaska Science Center.

Polar Bear International has teamed with more than 35 Zoos to organize the “Year of the polar bear,” which began January 1, 2008.  “PBI’s two-pronged mission is to support conservation measures through scientific research and to educate the public about issues relating to the polar bear and its habitat.”

Biology of Stress

Cortisol is a hormone associated with they body’s response to stressful situations.

  Researcher Dario Maestripieri at the University of Chicago is involved in research to determine how breastfeeding and having offspring affect the body’s stress response by measuring cortisol.

 His research uses rhesus monkeys that are relatively genetically similar to humans and also demonstrate similar behavioral characteristics.  Separating a free ranging monkey from its group is stressful for monkeys, so the researchers  capturing free-ranging monkeys and took blood samples to measure hormone levels at different time periods and then  analyzed the samples according to reproductive status - lactating, pregnant, neither pregnant nor lactating, while controlling for other variables such as age and rank.

The paper states “This analysis represents the first direct comparison of cortisol responses to stress in lactating and nonlactating females in nonhuman primates. We found no evidence of hyporesponsiveness to stress among lactating females. Rather, plasma cortisol levels were significantly higher in lactating than in nonlactating females, both shortly after capture and the morning after.”  Also, “Concerns over risk to their infants may explain why lactating females exhibited higher cortisol responses to trapping and individual housing and why these responses did not vary significantly across the 6 lactation months.”

This research is really important and interesting because stress can affect health and parenting behavior, so understanding the biological response to and natural causes of stress and is essential.

Issues in animal research

There are many strong feelings on both sides of the argument over using animals in research.  There are many people who accept animal research as necessary for furthering knowledge that is capable of saving lives and helping us understand more about human psychology and evolution.  Recently, there has been more work done to provide animals used in research with the more natural and stimulating environments to minimize the negative effects of life in captivity. 

Researchers warn: dolphins cannot heal illness

A group proposing that interacting with dolphins through a therapy program can help patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, emotional stress,  phobias, depression and Neurasthenia is facing criticism from researchers at Emory University who say that this therapy could actually cause harm to both patients and animals.  The program costs upward of $4,000 and includes lodging optimally dolphin-patient direct contact for 15-20 minutes once a day for a period of 7-10 days.