IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v74y2019icp12-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Individual differences in numerical skills are influenced by brain lateralization in guppies (Poecilia reticulata)

Author

Listed:
  • Gatto, Elia
  • Agrillo, Christian
  • Brown, Culum
  • Dadda, Marco

Abstract

A large number of studies showed that fish possess numerical abilities similar to those reported in mammals and birds. However, inter-individual differences in numerical performance are repeatedly found with different types of stimuli and methodological approaches. A recent study on guppies, Poecilia reticulata, suggested that strongly lateralized individuals, assayed for eye preference in a mirror test, were better than poorly lateralized ones when tested for numerical abilities in a natural shoal choice. This study, however, had a potential confound; both the mirror and the shoal choice tests exploit the higher sociality and schooling tendencies in guppies. It is therefore possible that sociality rather than lateralization per se may have been responsible for the observed differences. In the present study, guppies were selected for high or low lateralization using a non-social test, the detour test. Subjects preferentially turning rightward (RD) or leftward (LD) when facing a dummy predator visible behind a barrier proved better than those with no preference (NL) when required to choose the larger of two groups in a shoal choice test. Our study supports the notion that inter-individual differences in the numerical abilities of guppies are related to their degree of cerebral lateralization.

Suggested Citation

  • Gatto, Elia & Agrillo, Christian & Brown, Culum & Dadda, Marco, 2019. "Individual differences in numerical skills are influenced by brain lateralization in guppies (Poecilia reticulata)," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 12-17.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:74:y:2019:i:c:p:12-17
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2019.04.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028961830223X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2019.04.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Culum Brown & Maria Magat, 2011. "The evolution of lateralized foot use in parrots: a phylogenetic approach," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 22(6), pages 1201-1208.
    2. Rui F. Oliveira & Luis A. Carneiro & Adelino V. M. Canário, 2005. "No hormonal response in tied fights," Nature, Nature, vol. 437(7056), pages 207-208, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Montalbano, Giulia & Bertolucci, Cristiano & Lucon-Xiccato, Tyrone, 2020. "Measures of inhibitory control correlate between different tasks but do not predict problem-solving success in a fish, Poecilia reticulata," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Partha S Bhagavatula & Charles Claudianos & Michael R Ibbotson & Mandyam V Srinivasan, 2014. "Behavioral Lateralization and Optimal Route Choice in Flying Budgerigars," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, March.
    2. William D. Anderson & Cliff H. Summers, 2007. "Neuroendocrine Mechanisms, Stress Coping Strategies, and Social Dominance: Comparative Lessons about Leadership Potential," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 614(1), pages 102-130, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:74:y:2019:i:c:p:12-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.