Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, can distinguish more over-marks from fewer over-marks

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Animal Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Is it possible that voles have a sense of number? To address this question, we determined whether voles discriminate between two different scent-marking individuals and identify the individual whose scent marks was on top more often than the other individual. We tested whether voles show a preference for the individual whose scent marks was on top most often. If so, the simplest explanation was that voles can make a relative size judgement—such as distinguishing an area containing more of one individual’s over-marks as compared to less of another individual’s over-marks. We found that voles respond preferentially to the donor that provided a greater number of over-marks as compared to the donor that provided a lesser number of over-marks. Thus, we concluded that voles might display the capacity for relative numerousness. Interestingly, female voles were better able than male voles to distinguish between small differences in the relative number of over-marks by the two scent donors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beran MJ (2001) Summation and numerousness judgements of sequentially presented sets of items by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol 115:181–191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boonstra R, Xia X, Pavone L (1993) Mating system of the meadow vole, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Behav Ecol 4:83–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Boysen ST (1997) Representation of quantities by apes. Adv Stud Behav 26:435–462

    Google Scholar 

  • Boysen ST, Capaldi EJ (1993) The development of numerical competence: animal and human models. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brannon EM, Terrace HS (2000) Representation of the numerosities 1–9 by rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). J Exp Psychol Anim Behav Process 26:31–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen AB, Johnston RE, Kwon A (2001) How golden hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus) discriminate top from bottom flank scents in over-marks. J Comp Psychol 115:241–247

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Davis H (1993) Numerical competence in animals: life beyond clever Hans. In: Boysen ST, Capaldi EJ (eds) The development of numerical competence. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J., pp109–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis H, Perusse R (1988) Numerical competence in animals: definitional issues, current evidence, and a new research agenda. Behav Brain Sci 11:561–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH (1999) Scent over-marking as a competitive form of chemical communication in voles. In: Johnston RE, Muller-Schwarze D, Sorenson P (eds) Advances in chemical signals in vertebrates, number 8. Plenum, New York, pp 239–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH, Johnston RE (1995) Meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, use multiple sources of scent for sex recognition. Anim Behav 49:37–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH, Dunsavage J, Johnston RE (1999) What kind of information do meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, use to distinguish between the odors of the top and bottom-scent donors of an over-mark? J Comp Psychol 113:43–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH, Lee DN, Leonard ST (2004a) The reproductive state of female voles affects their scent marking behavior and the responses of male conspecifics to such marks. Ethology 110:257–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferkin MH, Li HZ, Leonard ST (2004b) Meadow voles and prairie voles differ in the percentage of conspecific marks that they over-mark. Acta Ethol (in press)

  • Ferkin MH, Mech SG, Paz-y-Mino CG (2001) Scent marking in meadow voles and prairie voles: a test of three hypotheses. Behaviour 138:1319–1336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallistel CR (1990) The organization of learning. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaulin SJ, Fitzgerald RW, Wartell MS (1990) Sex differences in spatial ability and activity in two vole species (Microtus ochrogaster and M. pennsylvanicus). J Comp Psychol 104:83–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Geary DC (1996) Sexual selection and sex differences in mathematical abilities. Behav Brain Sci 19:229–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosling LM, Roberts SC (2001) Scent marking in male mammals: cheat-proof signals to competitors and mates. Adv Stud Behav 30:169–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser MD (2000) What do animals think about numbers? Am Sci 88:144–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hauser MD, Tsao F, Garcia P, Spelke ES (2003) Evolutionary foundations of number: spontaneous representation of numerical magnitudes by cotton-top tamarins. Proc R Lond B Biol Sci 270:1441–1446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig WK, Stewart K (1989) Discrimination of relative numerosity in pigeons. Anim Learn Behav 21:346–354

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston RE (2003) Chemical communication in rodents: from pheromones to individual recognition. J Mamm 84:1141–1162

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston RE (1999) Scent over-marking: how do hamsters know whose scent is on top and why should it matter? In: Johnston RE, Muller-Schwarze D, Sorenson P (eds) Plenum, New York, pp 227–238

  • Johnston RE, Munver R., Tung C (1995) Scent counter marks: selective memory for the top scent by golden hamsters. Anim Behav 49:1435–1442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston ER, Sorokin ES, Ferkin MH (1997a) Scent counter-marking by male meadow voles: females prefer the top-scent male. Ethology 103:443–453

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston RE, Sorokin ES, Ferkin MH (1997b) Female voles discriminate males’ over-marks and prefer top-scent males. Anim Behav 54:679–690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keller BL (1985) Reproductive patterns. In: Tamarin RH (ed) Biology of New World Microtus, 8th edn. American Society of Mammalogists. Special Publication, Lawrence, Kan., pp 725–778

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilian A, Yana S, von Fersen L, Gunturkun O (2003) A bottlenose dolphin discriminates visual stimuli differing in numerosity. Learn Behav 31:133–142

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kohli KL, Ferkin MH (1999) Over-marking and adjacent marking are influenced by sibship in prairie voles, Microtus ochrogaster. Ethology 104:1–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipton JS, Spelke ES (2003) Origins of number sense: large-number discrimination in human infants. Psychol Sci 14:396–408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Machado A, Keen R (2003) Relative numerosity discrimination in the pigeon: further tests of the linear-exponential-ratio model. Behav Process 57:131–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madison DM (1980) An integrated view of the social biology of meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus. Biologist 62:20–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Milligan SR (1982) Induced ovulation in mammals. Oxf Rev Reprod 4:1–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Rich TJ, Hurst JL (1999) The competitive counter-marking hypothesis: reliable assessment of competitive ability by potential mates. Anim Behav 58:1027–1037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rozenfeld FM, LeBoulenge E, Rasmont R (1987) Urine marking by male bank voles (Clethrionomys glareolus Schreber, 1780; Microtidae, Rodentia) in relation to social rank. Can J Zool 65:2549–2601

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan MJ (1997) Sexual selection and mate choice. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell, Boston, Mass., pp 179–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Shettleworth S (1998) Cognition, evolution and behavior. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiessen DD, Rice M (1976) Mammalian scent gland marking and social behavior. Psychol Bull 83:505–539

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Uller C, Jaegar R, Guidry G, Martin C (2003) Salamanders (Plethodon cinerus) go for more: rudiments of number in an amphibian. Anim Cogn 6:105–112

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward RL Jr, Bartos K, Ferkin MH (2000) Different response of meadow voles (Microtus pennsylvanicus) and prairie voles (M. ochrogaster) to over-marks from opposite- and same-sex conspecifics. Ethology 106:979–992

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Augusta Okaputo, William Williams, and Hong Li for technical assistance. Funding was provided by the NIH BRIDGE program at The University of Memphis and NIH grant AG 16954-01 to M.H.F. and NIH grant to the Tennessee Mouse Mutagenesis Consortium

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, The University of Memphis, Ellington Hall, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA

    Michael H. Ferkin, Andrew A. Pierce, Robert O. Sealand & Javier delBarco-Trillo

Authors
  1. Michael H. Ferkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew A. Pierce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert O. Sealand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Javier delBarco-Trillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael H. Ferkin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ferkin, M.H., Pierce, A.A., Sealand, R.O. et al. Meadow voles, Microtus pennsylvanicus, can distinguish more over-marks from fewer over-marks. Anim Cogn 8, 182–189 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-004-0244-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-004-0244-9

Keywords