{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018685121107266434, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002768166089965398, 'mean_word_length': 4.760956175298805, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The maternal feeding display of domestic hens is sensitive to perceived chick error

An animal can be said to teach if, at some cost or at least without obtaining an immediate benefit for itself, it modifies its behaviour in the presence of a naive observer, such that the observer acquires a skill more efficiently than it might otherwise do. An important theoretical issue is the extent to which the demonstrator's behaviour is sensitive to the improving skill level of the observer. This study determined whether domestic hens,Gallus gallus domesticus, were sensitive to feeding errors by their chicks. The feeding displays of 12 hens were studied in two contexts: (1) in the presence of chicks that fed on a food colour that was palatable to the hen, and hence made no apparent feeding errors and (2) in the presence of chicks that fed on a food colour that was unpalatable to the hen, and hence made apparent feeding errors. Both groups of chicks, in reality, fed on palatable food. Hens responded more intensely to chicks that made apparent feeding errors. Hens increased the rate of ground pecking and scratching when they had no food available, and increased the rate of food pecking (although not food ingestion) when they were given food. It is suggested that hens are sensitive to perceived chick error, and that the costs of increased display intensity are balanced by the benefits of attracting chicks to more profitable food items.