| Title |
Direct observations of pandanus-tool manufacture and use by a New Caledonian crow (Corvus moneduloides)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Animal Cognition, November 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10071-003-0200-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gavin R. Hunt, Russell D. Gray |
| Abstract |
New Caledonian crows are reported to have impressive pandanus-tool manufacture abilities. These claims are based on an extensive artefact record. However, inferring behavioural and cognitive abilities without direct observation of tool manufacture is problematic. Here we report (and document on video) direct observations of a crow making and using stepped pandanus tools at Pic Ningua. We observed (1) a bias for making tools on left edges consistent with that previously found at the site, (2) faithful manufacture of a stepped design with high overall congruence in the shapes of tools, (3) the use of convergent rips to first form the tapered end working away from the trunk then the wide end working towards the trunk, (4) appropriate functional use of stepped tools by use of the leaf-edge barbs to hook food from holes, and (5) consistent holding of tools on the left side of its head when using them. Our observations verify most of the claims based on the artefact record, but the crow's exact manufacture technique was slightly different to that inferred previously. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 119 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 28 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 61 | 47% |
| Psychology | 24 | 18% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 4% |
| Philosophy | 4 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 18 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 October 2018.
All research outputs
#7,960,052
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#973
of 1,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,333
of 142,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,552 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 142,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.