Table 1.
Designation, description, and measurement of the behaviors observed during three studies on social learning in captive coyotes.
Fig 1.
Schematic depicting three of the 1000 m2 enclosures housing single or male-female pairs of coyotes within a single housing block at the USDA-National Wildlife Research Center’s Predator Research Facility (Millville, UT, USA).
The enclosures are tear-drop shaped, adjoined by a common observation building at the narrow ends. Subjects could see immediate neighbors through the chain-link fence at the wider end of the enclosure but could not see neighbors towards the narrow end because of cement walls abutting the observation building. A plywood fence was erected that extended from the cement wall when needed to prevent neighbors from seeing one another at the wide ends.
Fig 2.
The puzzle box used for task of study 1 (a) and captive coyotes at the USDA-Predator Research Facility performing the task of study 2 (b and c). Observer coyotes opened the puzzle box used in study 1 by pulling on the handles and uncovered the hoop covered with foam board used in study 2 with their muzzle (b) or paws (c).
Table 2.
Sample sizes of captive coyotes at the USDA-National Wildlife Research Center’s Predator Research Facility in Millville, Utah, USA, used in three different studies on social learning.
Fig 3.
Latency to solve a puzzle box in study 1 for successful observer and control coyotes across all trials.
Bar plots show mean ± SE for successful observer coyotes (number of observer coyotes that performed the task successfully on a given trial day is noted within parentheses directly in the bar plot). Sample sizes varied because not all coyotes were successful in every trial. Some control coyotes were also successful. Dots represent latency to solve the task for each successful control coyote in a given trial. ID of the successful control coyote appears directly beside the dot so that repeated successes by the same coyote are easily noted.
Table 3.
Set of models fitted to assess the relationship between treatment group and trial number and (A) problem solving success, (B) latency to solve, and (C) persistence.
The error distributions used in the models are specified by model family. Model comparison was based on AICc. Np is the number of parameters, ΔAICc is the difference between the candidate model and the model having the lowest AICc, and ωi is the AICc weight of each model (i.e. measure the likelihood that a given model is the best among the candidate models). Models retained based on the lowest AICc value appears in bold, and models retained based on parsimony rules in italic font.
Table 4.
Set of models fitted to assess the relationship between (A) problem solving success, treatment group, and trial number; (B) problem solving success within the observer treatment group and attentiveness, neophobia, and persistence; (C) attentiveness; and (D) persistence within the observer treatment group and sex, social rank, and trial number.
The error distributions used in the models are specified by model family. Model comparison was based on AICc. Np is the number of parameters, ΔAICc is the difference between the candidate model and the model having the lowest AICc, and ωi is the AICc weight of each model. Models retained based on the lowest AICc value appears in bold, and models retained based on parsimony rules in italic font.
Table 5.
Set of models fitted to assess the relationship between (A) problem solving success, (B) neophobia and (D) persistence and treatment group and trial number, (C) neophobia, and (E) persistence within the observer treatment group and individual characteristics (sex and social rank), and (F) time to eat inside the hoop for unsuccessful coyotes in the post-trial tests and treatment group, sex, and social rank.
The error distributions used in the models are specified by model family. Model comparison was based on AICc. Np is the number of parameters, ΔAICc is the difference between the candidate model and the model having the lowest AICc, and ωi is the AICc weight of each model. Models retained based on the lowest AICc value appears in bold, and models retained based on parsimony rules in italic font.
Fig 4.
Mean time ± SE in Study 3 for control (Con) and observer (Obs) coyotes, and for subordinate (Sub), neutral (Neu) and dominant (Dom) individuals within the observer treatment group (a) required to approach the experimental apparatus (seconds) and (b) spent working on the problem. Mean time ± SE for subordinate, neutral and dominant unsuccessful individuals to eat the food inside the hoop during the post-trial tests (minutes).