Talk:Bird intelligence
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Bird intelligence is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
|
WikiProject Birds To-do:
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Article suggestions
This article needs attention. Some of the sections seem to point out sensory abilities such as ultraviolet vision as examples of intelligence. Shyamal 04:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
- Subsequently rewrote the article a bit. Shyamal 04:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Adapting To Man-Made Environment
I witnessed an interesting incident at about 2PM, June 24, 2006 in Toms River, New Jersey. I was driving in moderate, but fast moving local traffic at about 35 to 40 MPH (56 to 64 kmPH).
Suddenly a small bird, that was being chased in flight by a much larger bird, flew in front of the car in front of me (a small car, with low road clearance) and underneath it. The larger bird just barely flew out of the way of the oncoming car, while the smaller bird flew out from behind the car and away, with significant extra distance between it and the larger bird (the larger bird may have been surprized or stunned by the near collision of it and the car and appeared to break off the chase).
This seems to me to be a good example of the smaller bird adapting to and utilizing the man-made environment, the fast moving automobiles on the road that is, to survive the attack of the larger bird.
Remember this the next time you hear somebody use the word birdbrain.
72.82.195.34 13:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Erm, what?
"A controversial study conducted by Ryan B. Reynolds has suggested budgerigars are able to form simple, meaningful sentences. The evidence consists so far of only audio files, but they have yet to be either proven or disproven."
If it has not been proven, why is it mentioned here?
Since the reference isn't a peer reviewed journal, I'd have to query it's weight as a source. The source also mentioning telepathy raises another flag about its suitability.
I have not edited the article, I leave that to someone prepared to take on the "flouride mind control" crowd.203.129.36.8 06:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] weirdness moved from article
Another study conducted with pigeons showed that the birds were able to distinguish between the artworks of different artists. For example, they could tell the difference between a Picasso and a Monet.
Cockatiels can count. Females lay five eggs. Take one away? She lays another. Take them all? She lays five more. Female pet cockatiels have a shorter life span than males due to the reproductive nutritional stress on the body. Minimize reproduction by allowing her sit continuously on the same batch of eggs. (Remove them just before they're scheduled to hatch and replace all five if she starts nesting again). To convince the pair to stop, you can rearrange the inside of their cage. If that doesn't work you can change the position of their cage in the room as well. They are that sensitive to novel circumstances.
The first paragraph is rather weird in terms of content, so it needs sources and specification (a study by whom, conducted when, etc.?). The second paragraph is written in a style that sheds doubt on the veracity of its content as well.--91.148.159.4 18:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Another move
I don't doubt the following information so much, but as another anon editor removed it, and as it has been unreferenced since October 2006, I think it is reasonable to keep it here rather than in the article. --91.148.159.4 12:06, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Conceptual skills
 |
This article does not cite any references or sources. (October 2006) Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. |
Some birds, notably pigeons, have demonstrated the ability to conceptualize. In one study, conducted at Harvard in 1964, it was shown that pigeons have a general concept of "human," which includes male humans and female humans, individual body parts, and the human body from the back, from below, and from above. When shown photographs of all of the above, the pigeons recognized the photos as "human." They also recognized photographs of human beings in "disguise" (i.e, a human in the nude, wearing strange clothes, or shown out of proportion).
[edit] I proofread a bit
Just for fun, I had a go at some language in this article. I do not think I made any substantive change at all, as I tried not to do so.Songflower 22:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Excellent work. Shyamal 02:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Penguins
I want to ask how are penguins intelligent? They are non-flying birds and can have large brain, but I can't find any information about their brain and intellectual abilities. Til. 29.03.07 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.227.194.147 (talk) 09:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Detour test + comments
I'd like to see some explanation here. How do cats "fail" the test? How does the test factor out differences in sensory biology? I'm assuming animals that hunt by sight (like cats) will be worse at it that animals that follow the scent (like pigs).
Just as an aside, the article seems to have been written by a bird enthusiast trying to counter the "bird brain" perception. As a fish enthusiast perfectly aware that many fishes are quite smart animals, I'm not unsympathetic. But I'd like a sense from the article of what proportion of birds have been tested for intelligence, and to what degree certain taxa (say, corvids or parrots) account for most of the "positive" examples of bird intelligence. There also needs to be made clearer the distinction between fixed instincts (such as the oystercatcher choosing the biggest egg-like object in range) that fit the image of "dumb birds" and the flexible ones (like blue tits learning to open milk bottles to get the cream). Also, there's some flipping back and forth between intelligence and sensory biology. I'd like to see that cleared up. The traditional approach in animal biology text books is simply to cover the sense first, then instincts, and then plastic behaviours ("intelligence").
Finally, there's a dearth of links explaining important terms. A lot of phrases, such as "environmental cues", "detour test", "auditory signals", "conspecifics", and so on have very specific meanings that may be self-evident to experts but are less so for casual readers.
Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 18:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Feel free to make the amends. From what I can see, the number of birds tested are few. Regarding the detour test, I think the statement is a second-hand citation from J P Scott (I supposed it used a glass screen. Could be outdated/incorrect given this [1]). Feel free to tag what you think needs citations, can look out for those or delete that which is untraceable. Shyamal 18:22, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Brain anatomy: XXth century
What's up with the use of "XXth century" in place of 20th century or twentieth century? I've never seen this used before. --GreenRiot 08:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
