It is the study of the instrument activities of man-like monkeys marked the beginning of the problem of thinking in animals. With the development of the ethology, the list of species to which the concept of instrument activity is attached is constantly expanding. Among mammals, the main observations concerned indian(Elephas Maximus.) I. african(Loxidonta africana.) elephants, Kalanov(Enhydra lutris), various bears. Primates, not only anthropoids, are indisputable for the greatest success in instrument activities. But even fish and insects became an object of studying ethologists in order to know the origins of tool.

Many animals, instrument activities have an instinctive nature. Kalanscapable with stones to break seashells, some birds use twigs or spines to learn insects. Let us remember the reels, which in the conditions of the abundance of the feed were deprived of the possibility of implementing feed-producing behavior with the help of a stick. In instinctive behavior, the use of stones is mainly based gryph(Neophron Pernopterus.) To break down the ores (Alcock J., 1984).

Birds give even more numerous examples of instrument activity than mammals. Bright examples are the buildings "Arbors" to attract females shalashniki, The use of stones, sticks, barns and other vendors. Building complex structures are sometimes considered by evolutionists as compensation for morphological changes during sexual selection. The "energy" price of such changes is not lower, given the goods of behavioral stereotypes (Reznikova J. I., 2005).

Recently, the fully instinctive nature of the tool activities of the birds is increasingly questioned. Watching observations that cannot be attributed only to the manifestation of instinct. The complex relationship between heredity and learning determines the instruments of the dyatlovy reels, such a favorite object of ethologists. An important role in this activity is played by learning by imitation, although it is also genetically determined - some types of reels do not possess such ability.

To unambiguously present the degree of genetic determination of instrument activities in one or another species is very difficult. You can rather talk about the predisposition to the possibility of using guns. Such an opportunity increases if there is a natural tendency to manipulate objects, which is available in some birds and mammals. In implementing instruments, instinctive, associative and cognitive processes are closely intertwined, and it can be difficult to carry out the border between them.

Important factors affecting the results result from the features of ontogenesis monkeys, where early experience plays a paramount role. Once again, it should be indicated on the value of the critical period in the formation of behavior. This applies to both the range of instinctively caused tools and new forms of learning. Even species that do not use guns in nature are capable of learning at an early age. Such studies were conducted on toy monkeys (ses. Callithricidae. ) tamarina(Saguinus Tamarin.). Perhaps the general ancestor of all primates has already had a genetic predisposition to instrument activities (Reznikova J. I., 2005). But upon reaching a certain age, the monkey of almost all species loses the ability to absorb many skills.

The favored factor of ontogenesis is the lack of "interfering" cognitive processes of stereotypes. Monkeys very easily form strong stereotypes, if any actions were successful. These stereotypes rigidly block the naturalism and instrument ingenuity of monkeys. It will not be superfluous to repeat that the person in this regard is no exception.

The abilities of anthropoids to instrument activities, as well as to language proficiency, are not implemented in nature. Their "spare mind", according to the figurative expression of A. N. Seversheva, is not used as unnecessary. Only u chimpanzeesin natural conditions, there is an instrument activity. They often use guns, breaking nuts with stones or leaning the anthrops of ants. These monkey skills acquire at the younger age, learning from the elders. Gorilla, Orangutansand bonoboin nature, practically do not apply guns.

• Go to Table of Contents section:Instinct and instinctive behavior
• - use of animals tools; ; ; ;

Investigation of animal instrument

J.I. Reznikova, the Institute of Systematics and Ecology of Animal SB RAS; Novosibirsk State University. Published: Journal of General Biology, 2006, N1

In the past three decades, the cognitive ethology, which studies the cognitive processes in animals and is based on the methods and approaches of psychology (Griffin, 1976, 1992; Allen, Bekoff, 1997; Shettleworth, 1998; Reznikova, 2000, 2005 [see Introduction and Chapter 8]; Bekoff, 2002). The problems of cognitive ethology are associated with the most complex mental processes in animals and are directly related to the search for the evolutionary roots of human intellectual activity. During the centuries, the use of guns was considered one of the most reliable behavioral signs that distinguish the person from other biological species. True, attentive observers have long drawn attention to the fact that animals can use different items in their activities.

Observations on monkeys, splitting stones of nuts, and elephants that drone flies of flies are found in medieval books. Darwin (Darwin, 1871) attracted the attention of the scientific community to the use of guns in animals and showed that a person is not the only appearance that manipulates objects to achieve the goal.

With the development of ethology, in the second half of the XX century, a list of species to which the concept of instrument activity is attached is significantly expanded. A lot of questions appeared: why representatives of some species use tools, and there are no other species; As far as animals are competent in the properties and connections of the objective world, to what extent affects the manifestation of the instrumental activity of animals individual and social experience, and how defined by the genetic program. The author had to face these problems when discussing the relationship between the communicative and instrument behavior of ants, in discussions that have repeatedly arose at the Etologic Conferences (Reznikova, 1995, 2001; Reznikova, Ryabko, 1997).

Despite the fact that the instrument behavior of animals was repeatedly seen in monographic reports and textbooks (Goodoll, 1992; Beck, 1980; McGrew, 1992, 2004; Reznikova, 2000, 2005 [see Introduction and Chapter 8]; Zorina, Poletalev, 2001) The task of analyzing the accumulated results within the paradigm of cognitive ethology remains relevant. The study of instrument activity is a wonderful tool for experimenters that study the limits of intellectual possibilities of animals. The use of this approach generates all new productive hypotheses in the field of cognitive ethology and comparative psychology. The explanation can be the use of intermediary languages \u200b\u200bto study animal intelligence, above all, man-like monkeys (Gardner B., Gardner R., 1969; Savage-Rumbaugh, 1986), as well as Parrots (Pepperberg, 1987) and Dolphins (Herman, 1986) .

Having entered into the "dialogue" with animals, the researchers managed not only to assess the potential of their communicative opportunities, but also to get the immediate "answers" of monkeys and parrots on questions regarding properties, forms, number of objects. However, the dialogue can only be joined with potentially "speaking" species, i.e. with such that you can offer an adequate intermediary language. Representatives of the "skillful" species provide researchers additional opportunities for knowledge of the limits of cognitive abilities. Solving the tasks assigned to the experimenters with the help of guns, animals provide an opportunity to judge how they choose objects for the manufacture of guns, how to estimate their properties, whether the results of their actions will anticipate the patterns of moving objects in space and in time.

In the review, on the basis of a brief description of the phenomenology of instruments, the experimental studies of the cognitive aspects of the instrument behavior of animals were analyzed. The systematization of the latest achievements in this field of knowledge provides grounds to consider the instrument behavior of animals as an effective methodological tool for the integral assessment of the cognitive capabilities of a number of biological species.

In some types of insects, there is a genuine use of guns, for example, in the opening OS. Thus, the representative of the genus Ammophila, falling asleep in the mink, in which she placed a paralyzed caterpillar with an egg attached to it, takes the tamper and align the Earth over the inlet of the pebble, which holds in the jaws. Making vibrating movements, the wasp is dropped with a pebble on a freshly saturated, well-pressing land until it lines it so that the entrance to the mink cannot be distinguished from the surrounding soil.

Famous English Etologist V. Torp also believes that a congenital tendency to pay special attention to objects suitable for use as a tool, and intensive treatment may be determining to form instruments. It was during the "handling of these objects a bird gets to meet their mechanical properties and with the possibilities of their use, and the necessary motor skills are produced from it by samples and errors. At the same time, Porp believes, the bird may not understand the value of the tools to solve the problem of extracting food.

The second point of view is close to the opinion of one of the specialists in the instrument behavior of animals by J. Elkok, who believes that the instrument action described here arose from random mooring with stones of an excited bird, which failed when trying to break the egg with a beak or throwing it to the ground. The bird's activity may in such cases, speaking by the language of ethologists, and "forward" to other objects, in particular, on the stones. In this case, the bird may instead of throwing the egg, throwing a stone, and a random hitting in a nearby egg can lead to the desired result. Mentally, more developed individuals will quickly establish a connection between its action and its result and another time will take advantage of the accumulated experience.

Of great interest are cases of birds use (one of the types of Australian zoodies of larks) of various items as a "hammer". For example, they use old bivalve shells to open the shells of living mollusks: half the old dry sink bird holds in the beak with a convex side of the book and knocks them on alive mollusks. Strong repeated blows of the bird flies the sink of the mollusk, after which, holding it with claws, it is accepted to pull out the beak slices from it.

A completely different kind of guns is used to open solid food objects Cockada ProBosciger Aterimus. His favorite delicacy is a nut with such a solid shell that it is possible to break it only a very heavy hammer.

Many birds should generally immerse objects into water or other liquids. Sometimes they "invent" new ways to use objects as a tool. So, one parrot learned to cry out the water with a smoking tube, holding her beak for the trunk (before that he often smeared food and solid items in the water), the other used the shell and half the peanut shell as a drinking cup. Then this bird learned how to drink from a teaspoon, which drove his paw to the beak. Another parrot scolded with a jar of water from the vessel and poured into a bath for swimming ... The number of such examples could be increased. Finally, it is necessary to mention another category of instrument actions, this use of auxiliary means in the field of how ethologists say, comfortable behavior, i.e. Care for your body, for example, for scratching. The instruments of animals of animals were observed mainly in the parrots, which are used for this need by some wand or chosper, sometimes and falling out his own pen, and in captivity and household items, such as a teaspoon.

When scratching the bird shoves the object in feathers, tightly clasped it with his fingers. Most often, the parrots are thus scratching head, sometimes neck (especially under the beak), back and other parts of the body.

When it comes to the use of guns in mammals, primarily dying on Kalan (maritime wizard) from the Kunih family, this amazing semi-wheeled inhabitant of the coast of the mainland and the islands of the northern part of the Pacific Ocean, an excellent swimmer and a diver. The front paws of the beast are flat pillows, on the underside of which the finger-shaped blades are located, in which the fingers are actually. Such a peculiar structure of the limb does not interfere, however, Calanus grab items and wrapping them. According to some information, he is able to keep a match in the front paw or even a needle.

The high level of mental development (in particular, it is impossible to refuse to refuse this) increases the potential opportunities to use objects as a tool, ensures more opportunities for implementing instruments and allows you to transfer such actions to new situations, apply them even in very unusual conditions.

In the formation of guns, the artificial conditions of its life in captivity played a decisive role - restriction of freedom of movement (the inability to get to the branches with fruits), the monotony of the feed diet is probably an ordinary boredom and, of course, constant communication with a person gives a rich material For "extension of the horizon", and imitating his actions. In mentally more developed individuals, which is undoubtedly a Ten, this leads to the invention of new ways to solve problems arising in the life of the animal (in this case, the use of the gun). In this example, it clearly appears the presence of potential abilities for instrument actions implemented, however, only in the event of need. After all, free-playing bears do not use guns - they are "life problems" they are perfectly solved without one, as well as the larger male in the aviary they did not need (it was enough to rise in full height).

Sometimes hoofs are used to the tools (more precisely, parns), i.e. Animals whose limbs are deprived of grabbing function. Objects used as tools, these animals are fixed by horns. There are cases of use of guns in elephants in captivity. Thus, visitors of zoos may sometimes see how the elephants scratch their heads and back with a stick, which is kept by a trunk.

Mammals use guns very limited and inferior to birds in this regard. This is explained by the fact that the tools play only a supporting role in the life of animals and are by no means decisive factors of their evolution. The high level of adaptability of the structure and behavior of mammals to the conditions of existence, the high efficiency of their very perfect "workers" of the organs - the oral apparatus and limbs, exceptional behavior flexibility fully ensures the successful implementation of all life functions without the use of aids (guns). And only in exceptional or even extreme cases, they are resorted to an additional instrument actions, and then, as we could make sure, mammals are quite skillfully and, most importantly, ingeniously operate with a variety of objects. The same, of course, applies to birds. However, the transformation of the forward limbs in the wings deprived of their ability to use these limbs for operating subjects or, in any case, extremely limited these possibilities. True, the grabbing function of the hind limbs has been preserved, and most birds have enough items with fingers playing a big role in their lives. But still, with this state of affairs, it is obvious, more often the need to resort to the use of auxiliary means, tools, at least because of the laborer should constantly perform their support function. This is probably one of the reasons more frequent than in mammals, use guns in birds.

If we take into account the true path of the evolution of the animal world and the diversity of environmental factors of animal behavior and do not try to find any phylogenetic connections between the "higher" and "lower" forms of instruments, then the study of the instrument behavior of various animals is definitely gives The most valuable material for the knowledge of their mental activity, in particular its potential opportunities. To the huge adaptive value of the latter with all certainty indicated by A.N. Severs residents, ranging them to the leading factors of the evolution of animals.

It should be obviously not to speak not about the evolution of the instrumental action themselves, but about the progressive development of the potential possibilities of their implementation in the process of the evolution of the psyche, which, in turn, is an integral part of the overall process of the evolution of the animal world.

Tool activities - animals, use by animals K.L. Objects (stones, sticks, twigs, etc.) as a tool for performing a certain task. O. d. Described by some birds and mammals. The Galapagos Dyatlove Reel gets with a spike, to-ry, it holds in the beak, insects from the cracks in the tree bark. SIP breaks the thick shell of an ostrich egg with a stone. Calax also enrolls with strong mollusc shells. Chimpanzee takes termites from the hole of the fracther with a thin twist and crushes the shell of the nut with a stone. And a dyatlovy reel, and chimpanzees are able to choose among several. Spikes or twigs are naib, suitable for occasion or shortening the only one available to the desired length. However, no animal is capable of, like a person, to create with the help of guns dr. Tool.

The use of guns by animals is often considered as an indicator of uncommon mental abilities, but some features of the tool of the "brothers of our smaller" are forced to doubt the eligibility of such assessments. The ability to use guns does not always correlate with intelligence and also varies very much from different individuals within the same species. The gun activity of animals is different from human very rapid formation of sustainable associations and ritualization, which is manifested in a stubborn reproduction of the sequence of actions found once, even if they have lost their meaning in the changed circumstances.

The gun activity is widespread in mammals, and not only at monkeys. So, the elephants are distilled off with branches of flies, and if the broken branch is too large, they put it on the ground and, holding the foot, take off the trunk part of the desired size. Some rodents use pebbles for breaking and exhausting the soil during digging holes. Kalans (marine extermines) are dying attached to the rocks of mollusks using large stones - "hammers", and other, less large stones are used to break the shells (lying on the back on the surface of the water, the beast puts a stone-anvil on his chest and sink ). Bears are able to make fruit from trees with sticks; Locked the use of stones and block ice with white bears for killing seals.

22. Higher level of perceptual psyche: representatives and locomotor development

This group includes cartilage and bone fish, amphibians, reptiles and all other animals.

Features of animals at this stage:

Locomotive: diverse, and in animals on land due to the complexity of motor problems more perfect.

Manipulating: informative meaning. As specialized, part of the functions of the front limbs is transmitted by the mouth. Multifunctionality of the forelimbs.

There is already a comfortable behavior in arthropods (flies cleans yourself with your legs), but here it is much more diverse and individually.

The ability to audience, perception and recognition of the form. The severity is different at the lower and the highest vertebrates.

Communication: variety and differentiation. Optical communication: "Dialogues" Pos. Acoustic communication: voice, whistle wings when flying, tapping on the trunk. Individualization of communication.

Crying Fish: Sharks can navigate the individual properties of the object: Feel the smell of blood at a distance of several kilometers. There are two types of sharks - cathranes and feline sharks, similar to the structure, but various trained.

Reptiles are movable than amphibians. Plasticity behavior. The turtles were mainly studied. They distinguish the shape, vertical and horizontal strips (70-80 samples), but the tasks for the detection of an abstract sign "unequal" (3 Image: 2 the same, 1 - excellent) is not able to decide. Learn one sign, no ability to transfer. Experience cannot be used to solve other tasks of the same type. Labyrinth: Turtles learn to pass a 4-6-dead labyrinth, since in nature they face similar situations (holes). Extrapolation: Overcoming barriers + ability to foresee the direction of movement of feed. Not all - about half of the turtles, and land is better. This group, compared to amphibians, is more progressive (NA and lifestyle), so the ability to learn is better developed, although there are shortcomings.

In the birds, the relationship with the medium is more complex and diverse, the birds are much more mobile, are active all year round (warmth), the relationship in the field of nutrition is determined by the objects of nutrition that uses the species. Some types of food facilities are large animals, the process of catching which is very complicated. Some birds learned how to use primitive guns for peating foods (cacti, sticks, stones). The relationship in the selection of proceedings is also more difficult. Choosing a place for the nest, protection of the territory, feeding and training of chicks - in these areas congenital and acquired behavioral elements are closely related. For the first time, birds can enrich their experience through observation. Chicks of vultures as soon as they start walking, examine stones. A vane - locomotor game depending on habitat. This game is especially diverse in the conditions of the city, where birds can use items: riding, torn. Locomotor-manipulative game: Crow throws the stone along the drain tube and at the bottom is trying to catch it. Research behavior has been developed (it is difficult to sometimes distinguish from the manipulation game, since it often develops the same thing to another). In experimental situations, birds are easily trained in various instrumental actions, these skills are formed very quickly (up to 10 combinations).

23. The simplest types of regulation in animal behavior: Taxisis and Tropisms

Taxisi (from Greek. Taxis is the arrangement in order) - the orienting components of behavioral acts, congenital methods of spatial orientation towards favorable (positive taxis) or unfavorable (negative taxis) environmental conditions. In plants, similar reactions are expressed in changes in the direction of growth (tropisms). According to the modality of the effects, the photo, hemo-, thermotaxi, etc. differ Taxis of unicellular and many lower multicellular animals are represented by orthaxis (change the speed of movement) and clinaksis (change the direction of movement to a certain angle). In animals with a developed central nervous system and symmetricly located senses, it is also possible to actively choose the direction of movement and maintaining this direction (topotaxes). They are constant components of even the most complex forms of behavior.

Tropisms (from Greek. Tropos - turn, direction) - motion (height) of plants in certain directions caused by one-sided effect of the factors of the outer environment (light, earth attraction, chemicals, etc.). Attempting to explain on the basis of tropisms The behavior of organisms with the nervous system was undertaken by J. Lech, the concept of which, built on the principles of mechanistic determinism, was scientifically insolven .

• Go to Table of Contents section:Instinct and instinctive behavior
• - use of animals tools; ; ; ;

Terminology and a brief description of animal instrument activities in vivo

Elcock (Alcock, 1972) proposed the following definition of instruments: the use of guns is in manipulations with any inanimate object created outside the animal's own body and increases the effectiveness of its actions aimed at changing the position or form of some other subject. Goodall (GOODALL, 1970) gives a more brief definition: the use of certain objects of the outside world as a functional continuation of any part of the body to achieve the nearest goal. Beck (Beck, 1980) in the book "American animal behavior: the use and manufacture of guns" gives, in general, a similar definition: use of objects of the outside world to change the position, form or state of other objects, while the user holds the subject and controls its orientation and Efficiency of action.

In the terminology relating to this area of \u200b\u200bethology, there are elements of uncertainty and discrepancies, inevitable for the developing branch of experimental science. In particular, the differences between the gun and constructive types of animal activities are unclearly defined. In some cases, the boundaries between the concepts are vague, since the boundaries between the "long-term" and "closest" targets in the behavior of animals are very conventional. Other, still not entirely clear cases of the use of objects, such as the "zehorious" behavior of elephants throwing the branches of dead animals and suspicious objects for them (ants come in the same way with stains of a liquid or viscous substrate), apparently, can be attributed to manipulatory activity .

N.N. Ladygin-Kotce (1959) considered as a constructive activity to manipulate objects and the manufacture of structures (nests), and as a tool - the use of objects to achieve the goal. At the same time, complex forms of instruments include preparation and transformation of objects, i.e., the manufacture of guns. We will adhere to this terminology, especially since it matches and established in English literature to the Terminams: Tool Using (Using tools) and Tool Manufacture (Framework).

The gun activity includes both complex actions accompanied by the modification of objects and the use of simple "primary" means to achieve the goal. In the latter case, it is meant to use objects not changed by the animal activity: so, monkeys scratch the back with a stick or use a stone to split the nut. Such objects are called "Naturofacts", opposing them to artifacts, i.e. subjects that are the result of "aimed activities", such as a twist, pointed by teeth (Beck, 1980).

TOOLE MANUFACTURE is one of the most complex manifestations of animal cognitive activities. There are four different methods of manufacturing tools. The first is the easiest and most common among animals - cleavage (DETACH). An example is the torn branch, which is used without conversion, let's say, in order to drive a fly or throw into the enemy. The second method is reduction (subtract). The branch, purified from the leaves, is made by reduction. Such an instrument can be used, say, for "consideration" of ants or termites. If the branch itself is used, and the leaves are torn from it (for example, to erase blood or dirt), then the leaves are an instrument made in the first way, that is, by "cleavage". Third way - Combination of items (Combine). An example is inserted one into another sticks. The fourth, the most difficult of animals observed is a conversion (reshape). This method requires the animals of "representations" on the properties of objects that allow them to make a functional gun. The actions themselves may be simple, it is important that they are based on an understanding of animals causal relationships. Monkeys that crushed and chew the leaves to increase their adsorbing properties and use as a sponge to produce water from the hollow, use the conversion of objects (Beck, 1980; McGrew, 2004).

Consider a variety of examples of use of guns by representatives of different types of animals in situations close to natural, without observer intervention ...