↓ Skip to main content

Asian elephants acquire inaccessible food by blowing

Overview of attention for article published in Animal Cognition, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#28 of 902)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
16 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
23 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Asian elephants acquire inaccessible food by blowing
Published in
Animal Cognition, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10071-015-0929-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaori Mizuno, Naoko Irie, Mariko Hiraiwa-Hasegawa, Nobuyuki Kutsukake

Abstract

Many animals acquire otherwise inaccessible food with the aid of sticks and occasionally water. As an exception, some reports suggest that elephants manipulate breathing through their trunks to acquire inaccessible food. Here, we report on two female Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) in Kamine Zoo, Japan, who regularly blew to drive food within their reach. We experimentally investigated this behaviour by placing foods in inaccessible places. The elephants blew the food until it came within accessible range. Once the food was within range, the elephants were increasingly less likely to blow as the distance to the food became shorter. One subject manipulated her blowing duration based on food distance: longer when the food was distant. These results suggest that the elephants used their breath to achieve goals: that is, they used it not only to retrieve the food but also to fine-tune the food position for easy grasping. We also observed individual differences in the elephants' aptitude for this technique, which altered the efficiency of food acquisition. Thus, we added a new example of spontaneous behaviour for achieving a goal in animals. The use of breath to drive food is probably unique to elephants, with their dexterous trunks and familiarity with manipulating the act of blowing, which is commonly employed for self-comfort and acoustic communication.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 30 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 31%
Student > Master 7 22%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 38%
Psychology 8 25%
Environmental Science 4 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 3 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 175. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2016.
All research outputs
#65,437
of 12,222,940 outputs
Outputs from Animal Cognition
#28
of 902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,313
of 255,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Animal Cognition
#1
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,222,940 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 902 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 255,656 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.