466
submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 98 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

ARTICLE TEXT:

Humans' invention of zero was crucial for modern mathematics and science, but we're not the only species to consider "nothing" a number. Parrots and monkeys understand the concept of zero, and now bees have joined the club, too.

Honey bees are known to have some numerical skills such as the capacity to count to four, which may come in handy when keeping track of landmarks in their environment. To see whether these abilities extended to understanding zero, researchers trained 10 bees to identify the smaller of two numbers. Across a series of trials, they showed the insects two different pictures displaying a few black shapes on a white background. If the bees flew to the picture with the smaller number of shapes, they were given delicious sugar water, but if they flew toward the larger number, they were punished with bitter-tasting quinine.

Once the bees had learned to consistently make the correct choice, the researchers gave them a new option: a white background containing no shapes at all. Even though the bees had never seen an empty picture before, 64% of the time they chose this option rather than a picture containing two or three shapes, the authors report today in Science. This suggests that the insects understood that "zero" is less than two or three. And they weren't just going for the empty picture because it was new and interesting: Another group of bees trained to always choose the larger number tended to pick the nonzero image in this test.

In further experiments, the researchers showed that bees' understanding of zero was even more sophisticated: For example, they were able to distinguish between one and zero—a challenge even for some other members of the zero club. Advanced numerical abilities like this could give animals an evolutionary advantage, helping them keep track of predators and food sources. And if an insect can display such a thorough grasp of the number zero, write the researchers, then this ability may be more common in the animal kingdom than we think.

Source

[-] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

thank you king

[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Hmm, "64%" part irks me. What if statistical error was involved?

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

64% of the time 10 bees chose 0 is statistically significant but not with a low p-value.

You'd need to invest a lot more time and effort into proving this to get the P-value lower and I don't expect many institutions are willing to train 1000 bees to try and figure out if they get 0 or not.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Amazing! Thanks for sharing. :-)

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I love bees, and now I respect them even more. Glad it was interesting to someone other than me!

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

thank you so much for reposting the article text in the comments! it's so much more accessible (fewer taps) this way.

[-] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Wait until you find out ants pass the mirror test.

One study found that three species, Myrmica rubra, Myrmica ruginodis, and Myrmica sabuleti have shown potential for self-recognition (Cammaerts and Cammaerts, 2015). When exposed to a mirror, ants of all three species marked with a blue dot would attempt to clean themselves by touching the mark. Similar results were not exhibited when ants were marked with a brown dot, which is the same color as their body. It appears that the ants used their mirror reflection to see the unusual blue dot and attempt to clean it. If true, this behavior would indicate self-recognition.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I didn't even realize they could see much at all tbh. I thought most of their navigation was through smell! This is a super interesting article!

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

One thing I like to do with my pets when they're young is play with them through the mirror so they can make the connection that kitty getting their neck scritched is the same kitty getting their neck scritched. There's nothing more rewarding than the moment they look at you through the mirror, then look up at you directly and then do that little slow eye close showing that they know you are also the same person.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Amazing, specially considering that gorillas either fight or flee their reflection on mirrors. There are videos on YouTube, quite entertaining btw.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Interesting stuff!

[-] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago

Bees and recent humans:

[-] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago

The bees just thinking more black bad, less black good. No black best. I don't think it's actually counting.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

I don't think it's actually counting.

Right. Pretty racist though.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago
[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

They should do a control with 75% of the square covered with one black pip vs 25% covered by five.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No black best

This isn't the point? That the vast majority of animals don't have a working concept of "none" or "without" that they can form other logic and correlation with?

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

They are just avoiding black dude it's that simple.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

You need to be able to count in order to compare levels of black.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That's definitely not true. You can tell different sized block blobs from one another.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

Heh. I'm sure we all know a few of those non-"recent" humans that can't seem to grasp the concept. I just hope they're in lower numbers than expected this November. 😶

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This might be hard for you to understand but there might even be zero of them left

Editlol, I love how controversial this comment is. The joke was that if there were "zero of them", it wouldn't be hard for to understand for anyone. If it's hard for them to understand, the number of "non recent" humans wouldn't be zero. It's a self contradiction, a paradox, what ever. First and foremost it was a joke.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Found the article just for this part

...recent humans. (Fibonacci introduced zero to Western mathematics around the year 1200.)

A bit different from the bees' "understanding the concept of zero".

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/08/28/is-beekeeping-wrong

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Sounds like a snarky suckjob for genociders to me

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Just read the article. 64% is awfully near to 50%. Specially if the number of trials was low.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Its a 28% increase. To me, thats colloquially significant.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Now, I went to the research article. The number of trials (n) was 10. To me, this is not strong evidence. If an independent group would take upon this work and find similar results, I would very much be inclined to change my mind.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

10 trials is lot of replication and more than reliable enough. Thats improbable, even for a 50:50. Honestly, I'm quite taken aback that you think 10 repetitions of the same result isn't strong evidence and it screams that no one would ever be deemed independent enough, unless they found the results you wanted.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

If bees had 2 options, by random chance they would go to any of them (i.e. no learning or concept of zero). That's 50%. The article is based on 10 bees, and only 6.4? chose the correct answer. Ok, I am definitely not understanding this. I would need to re-read it...

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I'm not convinced that this represents "understanding the concept of zero" in a nontrivial sense. Are there species that can be taught to pick the picture with fewer shapes but then don't prefer a picture with no shapes?

[-] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

CROWS NOW BEES?

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

that's so interesting. I feel like we humans abuse the ability to choose nothing.

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago
[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I'd rather do nothing useful and continue doomscrolling my Lemmy feed.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Maybe this is just my hippocampus privilege, but I have a hard time imagining the concept of zero as being difficult to comprehend

this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2024
466 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

15991 readers
718 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS