Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37477740›Full record

ArticleAnimal cognition2023

Slowly walking down to the more food: relative quantity discrimination in African spurred tortoises (Centrochelys sulcata).

Masaki Tomonaga, Daiki Haraguchi, Anna Wilkinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animal cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Cold-blooded culture? Assessing cultural behaviour in reptiles and its potential conservation implications.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Response to intruder number is related to spontaneous quantity discrimination performance in a wild bird.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Masaki Tomonaga *Japan Monkey Centre, Inuyama, Aichi, 484-0081, Japan. masakitomonaga1964@gmail.com.
Daiki HaraguchiYamaguchi University, Ube, Yamaguchi, 755-8505, Japan.
Anna Wilkinson *School of Life Sciences, University of Lincoln, Lincoln, LN6 7DL, UK. AWilkinson@lincoln.ac.uk.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 15H05709Japan Society for the Promotion of Science JSPS-LGP-U04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantity discrimination, is thought to be highly adaptive as it allows an organism to select greater amounts of food or larger social groups. In contrast to mammals, the processes underlying this ability are not as well understood in reptiles. This study examined the effects of ratio and number size on relative quantity discrimination in African spurred tortoises (Centrochelys sulcata). To assess these effects, tortoises were presented with trays containing favored food pieces in all possible number combinations between 1 and 7. The tortoises had to approach the tray they perceived as having the larger quantity. If correct, they received one piece of food as reinforcement. The results revealed that relative quantity discrimination was influenced by the ratio between the numbers of pieces, with performance improving as the ratio between the numbers increased. This finding suggests that the approximate number system or analogue magnitude estimation may control their behavior. However, as the number size increased, their performance declined, also suggesting that the approximate number system alone could not explain the present results.

Indexed as

TurtlesAnimalsFoodMammalsReinforcement, PsychologyWalkingCognitionQuantity discriminationReptileTortoise

Identifiers

PMID37477740
PMCPMC10442272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.