IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0237817.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transitive inference in cleaner wrasses (Labroides dimidiatus)

Author

Listed:
  • Takashi Hotta
  • Kentaro Ueno
  • Yuya Hataji
  • Hika Kuroshima
  • Kazuo Fujita
  • Masanori Kohda

Abstract

Transitive inference (TI) is the ability to infer unknown relationships from previous information. To test TI in non-human animals, transitive responding has been examined in a TI task where non-adjacent pairs were presented after premise pair training. Some mammals, birds and paper wasps can pass TI tasks. Although previous studies showed that some fish are capable of TI in the social context, it remains unclear whether fish can pass TI task. Here, we conducted a TI task in cleaner wrasses (Labroides dimidiatus), which interact with various client fishes and conspecifics. Because they make decisions based on previous direct and indirect interactions in the context of cleaning interactions, we predicted that the ability of TI is beneficial for cleaner fish. Four tested fish were trained with four pairs of visual stimuli in a 5-term series: A-B+, B-C+, C-D+, and D-E+ (plus and minus denote rewards and non-rewards, respectively). After training, a novel pair, BD (BD test), was presented wherein the fish chose D more frequently than B. In contrast, reinforcement history did not predict the choice D. Our results suggest that cleaner fish passed the TI task, similar to mammals and birds. Although the mechanism underlying transitive responding in cleaner fish remains unclear, this work contributes to understanding cognitive abilities in fish.

Suggested Citation

  • Takashi Hotta & Kentaro Ueno & Yuya Hataji & Hika Kuroshima & Kazuo Fujita & Masanori Kohda, 2020. "Transitive inference in cleaner wrasses (Labroides dimidiatus)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-13, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0237817
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237817
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237817&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0237817?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guillermo Paz-y-Miño C & Alan B. Bond & Alan C. Kamil & Russell P. Balda, 2004. "Pinyon jays use transitive inference to predict social dominance," Nature, Nature, vol. 430(7001), pages 778-781, August.
    2. Redouan Bshary & Alexandra S. Grutter, 2006. "Image scoring and cooperation in a cleaner fish mutualism," Nature, Nature, vol. 441(7096), pages 975-978, June.
    3. Logan Grosenick & Tricia S. Clement & Russell D. Fernald, 2007. "Erratum: Fish can infer social rank by observation alone," Nature, Nature, vol. 446(7131), pages 102-102, March.
    4. Logan Grosenick & Tricia S. Clement & Russell D. Fernald, 2007. "Fish can infer social rank by observation alone," Nature, Nature, vol. 445(7126), pages 429-432, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ivan D Chase & W Brent Lindquist, 2016. "The Fragility of Individual-Based Explanations of Social Hierarchies: A Test Using Animal Pecking Orders," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, July.
    2. Greg Jensen & Fabian Muñoz & Yelda Alkan & Vincent P Ferrera & Herbert S Terrace, 2015. "Implicit Value Updating Explains Transitive Inference Performance: The Betasort Model," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-27, September.
    3. Andrea Polonioli, 2013. "Re-assessing the Heuristics debate," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 12(2), pages 263-271, November.
    4. Elizabeth A Hobson & Simon DeDeo, 2015. "Social Feedback and the Emergence of Rank in Animal Society," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Peng Liu & Haoxiang Xia, 2015. "Structure and evolution of co-authorship network in an interdisciplinary research field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 101-134, April.
    6. Florian Uhl & Max Ringler & Rachael Miller & Sarah A Deventer & Thomas Bugnyar & Christine Schwab, 2019. "Counting crows: population structure and group size variation in an urban population of crows," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 30(1), pages 57-67.
    7. Gifford Jr., Adam, 2009. "Cultural, cognition and human action," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 13-24, January.
    8. Niu, He & Chen, Yuyou & Ye, Hang & Zhang, Hong & Li, Yan & Chen, Shu, 2020. "Distinguishing punishing costly signals from nonpunishing costly signals can facilitate the emergence of altruistic punishment," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 371(C).
    9. DeScioli, Peter & Krishna, Siddhi, 2013. "Giving to whom? Altruism in different types of relationships," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 218-228.
    10. Tetsushi Ohdaira & Takao Terano, 2009. "Cooperation in the Prisoner's Dilemma Game Based on the Second-Best Decision," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(4), pages 1-7.
    11. Hannes Rusch & Max Albert, 2013. "Indirect Reciprocity, Golden Opportunities for Defection, and Inclusive Reputation," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201329, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    12. Simone Righi & Károly Takács, 2022. "Gossip: Perspective Taking to Establish Cooperation," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1086-1100, December.
    13. Wang, Xianjia & Ding, Rui & Zhao, Jinhua & Chen, Wenman & Gu, Cuiling, 2022. "Competition of punishment and reward among inequity-averse individuals in spatial public goods games," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    14. Murray, Cameron, 2020. "Do political donations buy reputation in an elite gift-exchange game?," OSF Preprints fc9rt, Center for Open Science.
    15. Song, Zhiyuan & Feldman, Marcus W., 2013. "Plant–animal mutualism in biological markets: Evolutionary and ecological dynamics driven by non-heritable phenotypic variance," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 20-30.
    16. Dieter Lukas, 2013. "Caring for Offspring in a World of Cheats," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-3, March.
    17. Fruteau, C., 2010. "Biological markets in the everyday lives of mangabeys and vervets : An observational and experimental study," Other publications TiSEM 3f4fc3e2-723d-4455-9ed2-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Han, Zhen & Zhu, Peican & Shi, Juan, 2023. "Novel payoff calculation resolves social dilemmas in networks," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    19. Zhang, Mingzhen & Yang, Naiding & Zhu, Xianglin & Wang, Yan, 2022. "The evolution of cooperation in public goods games on the scale-free community network under multiple strategy-updating rules," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 608(P1).
    20. Hisashi Ohtsuki & Yoh Iwasa & Martin A Nowak, 2015. "Reputation Effects in Public and Private Interactions," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-11, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0237817. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.