Clever clown of the mountains
The kea, Nestor notabilis, is generally believed to be one of the most intelligent birds. New Zealand is full of anectodes about the extraordinaire behaviour of these birds (as e.g. tearing the nose of a mountaineer biwaking beside a glacier). Its exploratory, curiosity and play behaviour are most conspicuous. Beside these and some other key features of the kea's biology, it is its almost complete lack of neophobia that makes this species especially attractive for cognitive investigations not only in the lab but also in the field. This neophilia may have evolved under the special circumstances of a harsh habitat on a eyeland wit a lack of predators.
The kea is one of six native parrot species of New Zealand . This It is olive-green parrot with bold orange-red under wing coverts is one of the few parrot species with sexual dimorphism: m M ales have longer bills and are heavier (960 g average) than females (780 g). It is endemic to the South Island where about 3000-5000 kea live in the mountain areas of southern beech (Nothofagus) forest, sub-alpine scrub and alpine grassland. No other parrot species occurs at such high altitudes throughout the whole year, even when there is snow during winter.
There they forage on more than 100 species of plants and insects: they feed on fruits and seeds from trees, bushes and grass, and nectar from flowers. They dig for roots of grass and herbs and catch insects. They feed on carcass and rubbish. About 150'000 keas were shot during the last 100 years because some keas attack and feed on live sheep. Since 1986 kea are fully protected by the government.
Compared to the kea's closest relative, the kaka, Nestor meridionalis, that inhabits lower altitude temperate forests, the kea has an extended juvenile period. After up to six months sixteen weeks of full dependence on their parents, young kea aggregate in social flocks until they form breeding pairs at the age of 4 to 5 years.
Thus, the kea fulfils many conditions that are believed to favor cognitive abilities: extended parental association, potentially long life span, group foraging, opportunism, curiosity and extreme iteroparity.
For people interested in reading more about the general biology of this explorative and playful parrot, we recommend the book by Judy Diamond and Alan Bond from the University of Nebraska:
Diamond, J. & Bond, A.B. (1999). Kea, bird of paradox: The Evolution and Behaviour of a New Zealand Parrot. Berkley et al: University of California Press .
We study both captive and fee-living keas. Our main Study site in the field is the village and its surrounding area of Mt. Cook National Park , New Zealand . Free ranging keas regularly frequent a large multi-storied hotel in Mount Cook Village , in the South Island of New Zealand (725 meters elevation, annual rainfall approximately 5000 mm). Keas in Mount Cook National Park gather at a number of locations in the vicinity of the hotel, mainly during early morning. During the last two years we banded more than eighty birds in collaboration with the Department of Conservation (te papa athahawy) of New Zealand . Thus most birds are individually marked in the local population.
Captive subjects are housed at the Konrad-Lorenz Institute for Comparative Ethology in Vienna. There is a 15 x 5 x3 m big aviary divided in three compartments with gates and sliding doors to allow easy separation of birds for short experiments. About ten keas are housed in this aviary, including a young breeding pair that is separated during breeding time. There is an additional smaller aviary for another young breeding pair. In 2003 one of the young pairs incubated for the first time a clutch of five eggs. One chick hatched, fledged 10 weeks later and enjoys participating in our experiments since then.
We are also investigating the kea in the group-aviary (6 keas) of the zoological garden Schoenbrunn, Vienna , the oldest and innovative zoological garden of the world.
Our research on cognition in kea includes three clusters of topics, as indicated by the circles in the figure below.
Each cluster of topics has strong relations to topics of other clusters and provides important information for research on them. Sometimes it is difficult to narrow down to which cluster a topic belongs to. For instance, keas perform innovative behavior in the field which has some relevance for our understanding about their motivation of exploration behavior, but immediately raises also questions whether they have also have insight in the physical causalities when performing that task (physical intelligence, common sense about physical causality, called folk physics) and whether this innovation will be transferred to other individuals and by which mechanisms (social learning, social intelligence). And in order to know which kind of information the birds use when they copy a task from another individual, or when you are designing a social learning experiment with an artificial fruit , it is of advantage to know what kind of physical concepts the subjects do have. For instance, an observer may learn from a demonstrator that a tube can be removed at the end of a pole only when it has the physical concept that a tube can be removed at the end of a pole (there are still many other ways how to copy a behavior of a demonstrator).
Current research projects
Social cognition subsumes many categories of and concepts about behavior. Our main focus is on social learning, but we also are interested in the formation of alliances and cooperation. Social structure is the scaffold of these processes.
Keas learn through emulation
Both, the pattern of exploration and the manipulation efficiency of young keas attempting to open a complex food container proved to be influenced by the observation of an experienced group member. Five individuals were allowed to observe a trained conspecific that iteratively demonstrated several techniques to open a large steel box. The lid of the box could be opened only after several locking devices had been dismantled: a bolt had to be poked out, a split pin had to be pulled, and a screw had to be twisted out. The observers' initial manipulative actions were compared with those of five naive control subjects (non-observers). Although the observers failed to completely open the box and thus to get the reward in their first attempts, they showed shorter approach latencies to the locking devices, enhanced exploration, and greater success in opening the locking devices. Although their initial attempts neither matched the response topography nor the sequence of the model's actions (movement or sequence imitation), their improved efficiency in unlocking the devices seemed to reflect the acquisition of some functional understanding of the task through observation (emulation learning or affordance learning ).
Testing social learning in the field
We conducted an experiment in which the efficiency of captive keas opening a complex food container was increased by observation of a skilled conspecific. However, only testing social learning in free ranging animals can demonstrate social learning in natural conditions. For that purpose, a tube-lifting paradigm was developed and tested on keas both in captivity and in Mount Cook National Park , New Zealand . The task was to remove a tube from an upright pole in order to gain access to a reward inside the tube. The top of the pole was higher than a standing kea so that, to remove the tube, an individual had to simultaneously climb onto the pole and manipulate the tube up the pole with its bill. Because only one naïve bird managed to remove a tube twice in 25 half-hour sessions, one bird was trained to solve the task and to provide demonstrations for others. Even under such conditions, only two of at least 15 birds learned to remove the tube in 28 sessions. There was no indication that observer birds' use of bill and feet when exploring the tube changed with increasing number of observations of tube removal in a way that would, in principle, increase the likelihood of tube removal. The results suggest a dissociation of social learning potential, as assessed in laboratory animals, and social transmission of foraging techniques in natural populations.
Cooperative abilities in kea
This study examines which factors contribute for successful cooperation in an instrumental task in wild and captive keas. An earlier study proved already cooperative abilities of keas. Successful interactions were clearly dependent on hierarchy with the dominant kea always getting the rewards and when separated from the group the dominant individual could force cooperation from the subordinate partner. Due to a non-linear hierarchy each partner could obtain rewards in a certain combination and cooperation was stable.
The apparatus in this experiment consisted of a wire mesh box with two food bowls. Keas had to coordinate their behavior by pulling a string on one side. This would bring the bowl to the opposite side where another kea could obtain rewards. No training with the apparatus or pulling of objects on strings was performed earlier.
During a three month study in the wild 41 successful interactions could be observed. A total of 43 kea were present at the study site, 11 of them learned to pull the bowl in an appropriate manner. The hierarchy of the successful candidates was non-linear but different from Tebbich et al.'s study the distribution of the rewards was not depending on hierarchy. Reciprocity in subsequent encounters with role reversals could be observed with dominant individuals obtaining significantly not more rewards than subordinate ones.
Five captive individuals in the zoo of Vienna showed a much higher success rate. Already in the first month the number so successful interactions was more than 900. All five individuals could pull the bowl in the required manner within minutes. The dominant bird would not monopolize the apparatus and this form of social tolerance partly explains the higher success rate. The hierarchy was linear and as necessary for cooperation to be stable reciprocity of roles was observed. As in the wild dominant individuals did significantly not gain more rewards then their subordinate partners.
Besides from social factors, their extraordinary explorative behavior and their skillfulness were the major factors accounting for the keas success.
Which strategies evolve when two partners are separated from the group and how far the individuals achieve a causal comprehension of the task or of the partner's role involved are currently studied in on-going tests.
The collected data about social relationships and social dynamics will as well be used to predict types of social learning, coordination and information.
Social structure of kea in MT Cook Village , New Zealand
Social structure is the scaffold of social transmission of new behavior (Huffman 1996) . Social data are also relevant to evaluate alternative benefits of sociality other than social learning such as e.g. social support and to consider the relevance of each of them in the evolution of sociality in kea. For example, we observed juveniles making regurgitating behavior towards other juveniles and fledglings, because this might help individuals to overcome periods of food scarcity when their foraging skills are insufficiently elaborated. Thus, establishing a network of allies might be an important alternative to social learning, both of them being a topic of social intelligence. Whereas there are solid data about social dynamics and alliances in primates, it only recently started to be described in captive birds such as corvids. Our study is aimed at contributing some data for wild parrots. Data about presence of individual birds, agonistic interactions, play behavior, allopreening, allofeeding and hunching (soliciting food from other animals) were collected whenever they were seen in the field. Scan samples of categories of activity and nearest neighbors were also recorded. These data (for agonistic interactions more than 2000 interactions meanwhile) provide the basis for a paper we are working on about the social structure of wild kea. Until now we have little evidence for redirected aggression, or any other type of aggression involving more than two parties in kea. Nevertheless there are some indications that allies may be important especially for young keas aggregated in flocks in order to acquire a high social rank.
Molecular ecology of wild kea
So far we were had insufficient knowledge about kinship of the kea at our study site in Mount Cook National Park, New Zealand . Therefore, we collect blood samples from more then forty individuals and Drs Bruce Robertson and Neil Gemmell (School of Biological Sciences , University of Canterbury , New Zealand) are addressing two aspects of kea ecology using molecular genetic techniques: (a) the identification of sex and (b) the assessment of relatedness of individuals within two separate localities using micro satellite genotyping.
High quality genomic DNA has been extracted from blood samples taken from the keas during 2003. Drs Robertson and Gemmell have adapted avian molecular tests of sex to kea. Using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of length polymorphism at the CHD gene with two primer sets (P2/P8: Griffith et al . 1998 & CHD2550/CHD2718: Fridolfsson & Ellegren 1999). There is a male bias in sex ratio (1:1.9 males). This is consistent with male sex biases found in the other large New Zealand parrots and barring sampling bias might reflect female mortality or biased sex allocation.
Relatedness of individual kea is being assessed using seven kakapo-specific microsatellite loci, which are informative in other NZ parrots. PCR conditions for these loci have been optimized for kea and at the time of writing, genetic variation has been screened at one locus (Sha01), which displays considerable allelic variability in kea. Relatedness values will be determined for all individual pair wise comparisons from this data. Drs Robertson and Gemmell are also assessing the presence of matrilineal groups using mitochondrial DNA variation at the 5' end of the kea control region.
Physical cognition (Folk Physics)
String-Pulling: Obtaining Food by Problem-Solving
The string-pulling paradigm has been tested in a variety of birds. In this task a reward is suspended from a string and the crucial step in solving the problem is a combination of several behavioral steps that must be completed in the right sequence. This includes reaching down, pulling up the string with the bill, placing the string on a perch, stepping on it with a foot, letting go of the bill, reaching down again, and repeating this cycle for at least 5 times.
Most studies showed that the birds either had a hereditary coordination of movements that was adapted to normal feeding habits or they simply would learn the task through trial and error. However, studies on ravens showed, that at least some individual ravens solved the task without any former training or trial-and-error learning thus implying that the mechanism used was insight.
Kea showed an extraordinary success rate in this study. Except for a fledgling all individuals spontaneously pulled up the reward in their first trial implying that they understood the mean-end-connection and the underlying physical properties of the task. When kea had to choose between two strings in eight different tasks they significantly selected the correct string in all tasks even when strings were crossed. Therefore kea clearly comprehended the functional connection between the string and the reward. Great individual differences both in the performance and the methods used to obtain the reward exclude innate behavior patterns.
The Trap-Tube Problem: No Understanding for a Trap?
This experiment, originally developed by Visalberghi & Limongelli (1994), examines cognitive abilities of tool use. Studies of tool use imply an understanding of the relation between an object and its purpose or the effect caused by an action. Tool use in wild keas has not been observed yet, but due to their highly developed explorative behavior and object manipulation causal understanding of a certain degree can be assumed.
Six kea participated in the experiment and were tested individually. In a short training phase a simple transparent Plexiglas tube was used and the individuals had to use a stick (plunger) to pull the rewards towards them. In the following test we used a Plexiglas tube with a transparent trap. Rewards could only be obtained by pulling the plunger to the side without the trap.
All six keas spontaneously solved the criteria in the training phase and obtained all rewards within a few minutes. During the test sessions none of them ever acted above chance level. Apparently there was no understanding of the causal properties of the tool-trap-reward configuration. Interestingly no learning appeared in a total of 100 trials.
Since we cannot exclude the lack of understanding between the use of the object (the plunger) and its effect on the reward a test with a new apparatus was conducted. Keas could move the reward directly with their bill, but by understanding the physical properties of the trap should avoid this side. As before subjects never acted above chance level. Even when the trap was removed (thus enabling them to gain the reward by pushing it only a few centimeters when choosing this side) they showed no preference for either side. Thus kea did not understand the functional relevant features of this means-end task.
Innovative behavior in the field - rubbish bin opening
Spontaneous and seasonal lid opening of rubbish bins in a local kea population was investigated in Mount Cook National Park, New Zealand . Although approximately more than thirty individually known keas visited the area of the hotel, where the rubbish bins were opened, only 5 individuals succeeded in opening the bins. These producers were occasionally watched by other kea in the vicinity. Many non-solvers tried persistently to open bins themselves but failed to do so. Bin openers were more often observed to feed in the area of the rubbish bins than non-solvers. Thus it would have been an advantage for non-solvers to become producers as well and not only to scrounge from bins already opened. Mistakes made during opening attempts and differences between age classes give some insights into the subjects' causal understanding in this task. Social rank restricted access to the bins to some extent but the mayor difficulty for non-solvers seems to be the mechanical problem to open the lid (rubbish bin opening in the lab) . The few solvers of bin opening demonstrate that the kea is an innovative bird species. While there is a clear correlation between brain size, innovation and social learning in primates, there is only good evidence for a correlation of brain size and innovation in birds and the relation between brain size or innovation and social learning in birds remains unclear. We found no evidence for social learning in an operant task in this local population of kea either (testing social learning in wild keas) .
Rubbish bin opening in the lab
About one of ten unsuccessful attempts of wild keas to open rubbish bins at a kitchen corner of Mt. Cook Village indicate that they have an inappropriate concept for a bin lid that is free to open. Thus, about nine of ten inappropriate attempts happened even when they attempted to open a lid that was not blocked. A plausible reason we they failed also in such situations is that they do not understand that they have to bring an object to a certain position in relation to another object in order to solve the task (that is, to bring the lid in an upright position towards the hinges of the rubbish bin). A similar cause may be the reason for the failure of most wild kea to remove a tube from an upright pole (tube-removal task). To bring an object to a position in relation to other objects may also be a mayor problem in tool use behavior (Fragaszy, personal communication). In controlled experiments with the captive keas in Vienna we will investigate the difficulties kea have in opening the rubbish bins and whether they have inappropriate physical concepts to solve such kind of tasks.
Insight in tube removal?
In order to test the keas understanding about the interrelation between pole end and tube removal of the tube-removal task , we offered them two poles simultaneously: the (appropriate) pole with the conventional upper end and an (inappropriate) pole with a small board fixed at the end of the pole that blocked the removal of any tubes. All birds failed to choose the correct pole first in the beginning. But they learned to do so within 10 trials. In order to test whether this failure during the first trials was due to earlier experience when no incorrect choice was possible in a succession of several trials, they were given further experience with the two-pole apparatus. Two Three of the five six birds were given additional opportunity to explore the tube at the blocked pole each time after the tube was removed at the correct pole until they stopped to lift the tube at the incorrect pole. Then a critical test was performed with new changes at the end of both poles. These two Three subjects with increased prior experience choose the correct pole in the critical transfer test, indicating that keas are able to develop some kind of physical causality for this task. The other three subjects choose the incorrect pole. The interpretation for this result is these three subjects, although significantly preferring the correct pole in the old two-pole apparatus in their first choice, were still playfully exploring the apparatus. When two of the failing birds were given additional training on the former two-pole apparatus as in the other group , they choose immediately the correct pole in the transfer test. This indicates the difficulty of experimental design with such playful birds. Only when there is sufficient indication that playful exploration decreased considerably, critical test should be performed.
Motivational aspects of explorative behavior
Motivational aspects of explorative behavior are very important for us because we are investigation social learning with artificial fruits . Thus seasonal or ontogenitcal changes in motivation of object exploration might have an important effect on our investigations on social learning. When investigating physical intelligence with an apparatus providing a mechanical problem, it is also important to know the motivation of exploration.
Novel item vs. food: The information primacy hypothesis
Starvation during the first winter is one of the main causes for mortality in free ranging keas. Therefore it can be assumed to be of crucial importance for these birds to learn about effective strategies of food acquisition during their first year of life. It seems likely that exploring and manipulating unknown objects are an intrinsic part of kea learning. We designed an experiment to investigate whether the animals, or animals of specific sex- or age-classes are more motivated to forage or more motivated to manipulate and explore unknown objects. When presented with a novel item object and food at the same time, which items do kea initially choose? What is the relative proportion of time that individuals are engaged with the item of choice? How do the social interactions at a feeding-site and/or playground alter during the year? The proportion of time spent manipulating the object should give an indication of the relative attractiveness of the object in relation to the food item. An important aspect of the experiment will be whether the preference of object or food item changes throughout the year (e.g., kea may prefer the food item more in winter when food is more scarce than in summer). We expect that this preference change with age, as adults may be more oriented toward foraging, whereas fledglings and juveniles may be more attuned to learning about new aspects within their environment.
Ontogeny of neophilia and object exploration in Kea
There are radical behavioral changes between fledged, juvenile, subadult and adult keas. Chicks normally start to leave the nest and to explore the surrounding area of the nest between the 11 th and 15 th week after hatching. Juvenile, subadult and adult Keas are highly explorative and hardly neophobic, whilst fledglings show neophobic behavior in the beginning. So far little is known about the period and especially the development of the changes. Therefore, neophilia experiments were conducted with two fledgling hatched in 2003 at the Konrad Lorenz Institute for Comparative Ethology and at the zoological Garden Schönbrunn, Vienna . Known and unknown objects were presented to the subjects at different stages of ontogeny. The first one took place during nestling period (8-10 weeks after hatching), the second and the third after it had left the nest (16-19 and 20-21 week). The last one was done when the subject was about nine month old, independent off its parents and housed together with other keas. Obvious change from neophobic to neophilic behavior happened between 17 and 18 week of life. N I repeated the n eophilia experiment were repeated with older keas and e xperiments on with older keas and conducted the tube lifting and string pulling experiments were conducted with the fledglings as well in order to compare age classes. Analyses of data are in progress.
Huber, L., Rechberger, S. & Taborski (2001) Social learning affects object exploration and manipulation in keas, Nestor notabilis . Animal Behaviour, 62, 945-954.
Huber, L. (2002) Clever birds: Keas learn through observation. Interpretive Birding Bulletin 3 (4), 57-59.
Gajdon, G. K., Fijn, N. & Huber, L. (2004) Testing social learning in a wild mountain parrot, the kea (Nestor notabilis). Learning & Behavior 32, 62-71.
Werdenich, D. & Huber, L. (2006) A case of quick problem solving in birds: string pulling in keas, Nestor notabilis. Animal Behaviour 71, 855–863.
Gajdon, G. K., Fijn, N. & Huber, L. (2006) Limited spread of innovation in a wild parrot, the kea (Nestor notabilis). Animal Cognition 9, 173-181.
Huber, L. & Gajdon, G. (2006). Technical intelligence in animals: the kea model. Animal Cognition 9, 295–305.
Huber, L. (2007) Emulation Learning: The Integration of Technical and Social Cognition. In: Imitation and Social Learning in Robots, Humans and Animals: Behavioural, Social and Communicative Dimensions (Ed. by Dautenhahn, K. & Nehaniv, C. L.), pp. 427–439. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Huber, L., Gajdon, G., Federspiel, I. & Werdenich, D. (2008) Cooperation in Keas: Social and Cognitive Factors. In: Origins of the social mind: Evolutionary and developmental views (Ed. by Itakura, S. & Fujita, K.), pp. 99–119. Tokyo: Springer.
Range, F., Horn, L., Pertl, M., Gajdon, Gy.K., Bugnyar, T., & L. Huber, L. (2009) Social attention in keas, dogs, and human children. Animal Cognition, 12, 181-192.
Auersperg, A. M., Gajdon, G. K. & Huber, L. (2009) Kea (Nestor notabilis) consider spatial relationships between objects in the support problem. Biology Letters published online 1 May 2009, doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2009.0114
Schloegl, C., Dierks, A., Gajdon, G. K., Huber, L., Kotrschal, K. & Bugnyar, T. 2009. What You See Is What You Get? Exclusion Performances in Ravens and Keas. PLoS ONE, 4, e6368.
Huber, L. 2002: Emulation or imitation: Social learning in keas. Poster at: Perspectives on imitation, 24-26 May 2002, Royaumont de Abbey, France.
Voelkl, B., Gajdon, G.K. & Huber, L. (2002). Examination of kea's (Nestor notabilis) nests at Mount Cook National Park . Poster at: 23rd International Ornithological Congress, 11-17 August 2002, Beijing, China , p. 271.
Gajdon, G.K. (2002). Programmed changes in dominance of brain hemispheres as a simple rule for generating complex patterns in behavioural development? Poster at: Self-organization and Evolution of Social Behaviour, 8-13 September 2002, Monte Verita, Ascona, Switzerland.
Gajdon, G.K., Ortner, M.T. & Huber, L. (2003). Do keas have insight in a tube removal task? Poster at: ASAB Summer Meeting: Personality: Patterns, Mechanisms and Functions. Why are we all different? 20-23 July 2003, Grünau , Austria, p. 54.
Federspiel, I., Gajdon, Gy. K. & Huber, L. (2004). The seesaw paradigm: how kea develop social and technical intelligence. Poster at: Altenberg Workshop in Animal Logic, Altenberg, Austria .
Pesendorfer, M., Gajdon, Gy. K., Ortner, T. M., Tschiedel, E. & Huber, L. (2004 ). Development of object permanence in kea(Nestor notabilis). Poster at: Altenberg Workshop in Animal Logics, Altenberg, Austria.
Riedesser, S., Federspiel, I., Gajdon, Gy. K., Rechberger, S. & Huber, L. (2004). The logic of lock in kea. Poster at: Altenberg Workshop in Animal Logic, Altenberg, Austria.
Wolf, C.C., Gajdon, Gy.K., Bürger, C. & L. Huber (2008) Do kea (Nestor notabilis) solve mechanical problems according to prior non-rewarded exploration experience? 4th European Conference on Behavioural Biology, July 18-20 2008, Dijon, France, p 361.
Bayern, A.M.I., Huber, L. & Gy.K., Gajdon (2008) Support problem tasks in kea (Nestor notabilis). 4th European Conference on Behavioural Biology, July 18-20 2008, Dijon, France, p 214.
Hiromitsu, M., Gajdon, Gy.K., Huber, L., & Fujita, K. (2008) Do kea (Nestor notabilis) plan before starting to solve an artificial-fruit box with multiple locks? 4th European Conference on Behavioural Biology, July 18-20 2008, Dijon, France, p 314.
Die Universität - Science goes public , 2002: Spielen und Zuschauen: Bergpapageien beim Lernen (Ludwig Huber, Playing and observing; when mountain parrots learn), www.univie.ac.at/dieuniversitaet/2002/science/10000745.htm
National Geographic, January 2002: Schlaue Keas lernen durch zusehen (Ludwig Huber, Clever keas learn by observation).
Neue Zürcher Zeitung: 6 February 2002, p. 51: Intelligente Clowns der Berge (Claudia Rutte, Intelligent clowns of the mountains).
BBC Wildlife, March 2002, p 23: Not just a pritty polly: Kea curiosity is copied (Tamsin Constable).
The Timaru Harald Tribune, 6 May 2002, p. 1: Austrian studying intelligence of keas (Rhonda Markby).
P.M., July 2002, pp. 93-98: Ich weiss schon, was ich tue. Haben Vögel ein Bewusstsein? (Marianne Oertl, I know what I am doing. Consciousness in birds?)
Interpretive Birding, July/August 2002, pp. 57-59: Clever birds: kea learn through observation (Ludwig Huber).
The Timaru Harald Tribune, 1 March 2003, p. 7: Keas after Bin Laden with kitchen scraps (Rhonda Markby).
Mackenzie Mail, June 2003: Flying Monkeys and Feathered Toddlers (Fenella Hemm).
Die Presse (A), 12 January 2004, p. 26: Gefiederte Affen an den Kisten (Beate Gasser, Feathered monkeys exploring boxes ).
National Geographic cover story, “Inside Animal Minds” March 2008 issue
tiernews. Das Migros-Magazin für Tier und Mensch. Ausgabe 1/2008; 1. Sept. 2008, pp 24-25: Wer spricht denn da? Sprechende Vögel sind besonders intelligent (Gyula Gajdon, Who’s speaking? Vocal imitating birds are especially intelligent)
Profil (25. 8. 2008): cover story (p. 88-96) “Die Evolution des Verstandes”, mit Bericht vom kea-Projekt.
Gajdon, Gy.K. (2008). Wie Keas die Welt sehen (How keas see the world). Talk for the public series lecture “Brain Awareness Week”. University of Vienna, 14/03/2008, Vienna.
Gajdon, Gy.K. (2008) Presentation about and guidance at kea lab for visitors invited by CompCog Research Networking Programm, ESF European Science Foundation, 25/09/2008
ORF: Modern Times, 14/1/2000: Gefiederte Genies ( Feathered genii; Documetary about the research project of the University of Vienna on kea intelligence).
CNN World Report: English version of ORF Modern Times Gefiederte Genies.
ORF-Ö1: HörfunkreiheVom Leben der Natur, 2-6/12/2002: Bergpapageien ( About the life of nature; Documetary about the research project of the University of Vienna on kea intelligence).
Südwest 3; WDR; BR alpha: Planet Wissen, 6/11/2002: Intelligenz (Documetary about the research project of the University of Vienna on kea intelligence).
Pro Sieben: Welt der Wunder: Papageien (Documetary about the research project of the University of Vienna on kea intelligence).
Hessen Fernsehen: Wunder der Erde, 4/12/2002: Documetary about the research project of the University of Vienna on kea intelligence. Text and Camera: Alexander Schlichter; Cut: Christine Gundlach.
"Keas" for Wildlife On One, BBC NHU. In progress.
Birdchannel.com, 11/8/2008: The Kea Parrot: New Zealand's Distinct Bird (Angela Pham).
ARD, Willi wills wissen (Willi wants to know): 04/10/2008. TV-Broadcasting for children on animal intelligence. Producer: Franz Xaver Gernstl and Fidelis Mager.
Fijn, N., with photographs by Morris, R. (2003). The Kea. NZ Birds Series. Reed Publishing , New Zealand .
Talks, at scientific congresses
Gajdon, G.K, Fijn, N. & Huber, L. (2003). Cognitive aspects of spontaneous bin opening and experimental tube removal in a wild mountain parrot, the kea ( Nestor notabilis). Revista de Ethologica Suplementa; Contributions to the XXVIII International Ethological Conference, Florianopolis , Brazil 2003, 5, p. 94.
Huber, L. (2008) Are animals really rational, intentional and efficient? Symposium "Rational animal, Irrational man", Keio University, Tokyo, Japan, 9–11. 2. 2008
Huber, L. (2008) Biology of Cognition in Vienna. European Science Foundation meeting “Comparative Cognition”, Strasbourg, France, 6–7. 5. 2008
Gajdon, Gy.K., Bayern, A.M.I., Wolf, C.C., & L. Huber (2008) Kea (Nestor notabilis) do not use tools during natural foraging but spontaneously develop skills for doing so when tasks are offered experimentally. 4th European Conference on Behavioural Biology, July 18-20 2008, Dijon, France, p94.
Huber, L. (2008) Soziale, technische und konzeptuelle Kognitionsleistungen bei Vögeln“. Plenarvortrag bei der 141. Jahresversammlung der Deutschen Ornithologen-Gesellschaft, Bremen, 2–6. 10. 2008
Huber, L. (2008) Kognitive Ähnlichkeiten von Menschen und anderen Tieren, Tierrechtskongress Wien, 27.–30. 11. 2008
Learnz Audioconference (May 2002): Fijn, N on Kea for New Zealand secondary schools, Aoraki/Mt Cook.
Gajdon, G.K (2002). Social and physical competence in Kea. Talk at the Konrad-Lorenz-Institute for Comparative Ethology, 16/10/2002, Vienna .
Huber, L. (2002). Spielarten des Geistes am Beispiel Nestor notabilisund Homo sapiens (Kinds of mind with examples of Nestor notabilis and Homo sapiens). Talk at the Institute of Zoology , 18.11.2002, Vienna .
Gajdon, G.K. & Fijn, N. (2003). Kea research in the Park. Summer time speakers of Aoraki/Mount Cook National Park, New Zealand , 25/2/2003.
Gajdon, G.K. (2003). Eine Reise in die Welt und das Denken des Kea (A travel to the world and thinking of the kea). Talk at the Zoological Garden Schoenbrunn, 12/3/2003, Vienna .
Gajdon, G. K. (2004 ) The true cleverness of the kea. Public talk in the Hotel Hermitage, Mount Cook Village, Aoraki/Mount Cook National Park, New Zealand , 2/11/2004
Gajdon, G. K. (2004) Playing kea and researcher. School lesson about the Viennese kea research in the park , School of Mount Cook Village, Aoraki/Mount Cook National Park, New Zealand, 13/12/2004.
Contact: Dr. Gyula Gajdon, firstname.lastname@example.org