ReviewAnimal cognition2020
Arthropod spatial cognition.
Review in Animal cognition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Heads and tails of individual differences: the role of environmental complexity in cognitive development of juvenile lobsters.Animal cognition · 2026Article
- Unraveling the neural basis of spatial orientation in arthropods.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2023Article
- Adding the neuro to cognition: from food storing to nest building.Animal cognition · 2023Review
- The effect of unexpected rewards on decision making in cuttlefish.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Orientation behavior of riparian long-jawed orb weavers (Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Minimal physicalism as a scale-free substrate for cognition and consciousness.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The feats of arthropods, and of the well-studied insects and crustaceans in particular, have fascinated scientists and laymen alike for centuries. Arthropods show a diverse repertoire of cognitive feats, of often unexpected sophistication. Despite their smaller brains and resulting lower neuronal capacity, the cognitive abilities of arthropods are comparable to, or may even exceed, those of vertebrates, depending on the species compared. Miniature brains often provide parsimonious but smart solutions for complex behaviours or ecologically relevant problems. This makes arthropods inspiring subjects for basic research, bionics, and robotics. Investigations of arthropod spatial cognition have originally concentrated on the honeybee, an animal domesticated for several thousand years. Bees are easy to keep and handle, making this species amenable to experimental study. However, there are an estimated 5-10 million arthropod species worldwide, with a broad diversity of lifestyles, ecology, and cognitive abilities. This high diversity provides ample opportunity for comparative analyses. Comparative study, rather than focusing on single model species, is well suited to scrutinise the link between ecological niche, lifestyle, and cognitive competence. It also allows the discovery of general concepts that are transferable between distantly related groups of organisms. With species diversity and a comparative approach in mind, this special issue compiles four review articles and ten original research reports from a spectrum of arthropod species. These contributions range from the well-studied hymenopterans, and ants in particular, to chelicerates and crustaceans. They thus present a broad spectrum of glimpses into current research on arthropod spatial cognition, and together they cogently emphasise the merits of research into arthropod cognitive achievements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.