This study presents the first evidence of effects of applying both positive and negative stimuli simultaneously on visual laterality in Old World monkeys. Thirteen captive individuals of Sichuan snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus roxellana) were chosen as focal subjects in the monocular box task. In total, 4 emotional categories (the preferred, the novel, the neutral, and the fearful) of visual stimuli were applied, and eye preference was recorded when individuals looked at each stimulus through an observation hole in the box. We found evidence of visual laterality at the individual level, but not at the group level for each stimulus. For the preferred stimulus, 9 individuals showed significant right-eye preference while 4 individuals showed significant left-eye preference. For the other 3 stimuli, 7 individuals displayed significant right-eye preference while 6 individuals displayed significant left-eye preference. Totally, 11 of 13 individuals showed consistency in the visual laterality direction (7 right-eye preference and 4 left-eye preference) across the 4 stimuli. The remaining 2 individuals displayed right-eye preference for the preferred stimulus while they showed left-eye preference for the other 3 stimuli. There was no significant difference among various stimuli regarding the direction of visual laterality. However, there was a significant difference in the strength of visual laterality among various stimulus categories. The strength of visual laterality for the preferred stimulus was significantly lower than that for the other 3 stimuli. The strength of visual laterality for the fearful stimulus was significantly higher than that for the novel stimulus and the neutral stimulus. Furthermore, the looking duration for the preferred stimulus was significantly higher than that for the other 3 stimuli. The looking duration for the novel stimulus was significantly higher than that for the neutral stimulus and the fearful stimulus. The looking duration for the neutral stimulus was significantly higher than that for the fearful stimulus. Our findings indicate emotional valence of stimuli significantly influence eye looking duration and the strength of visual laterality but not for the direction of visual laterality in this species. Taken together, emotional valence of stimuli plays an important role in the eye use of R. roxellana.

Keywords:
Emotional valence, Hemispheric asymmetries, Old World monkeys, Strength of laterality
1.
Bard KA, Hopkins WD, Fort CL (1990). Lateral bias in infant chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology 104: 309–321.
2.
Bibost AL, Brown C (2014). Laterality influences cognitive performance in rainbowfish Melanotaenia duboulayi. Animal Cognition 17: 1045–1051.
3.
Bisazza A, Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G (1998). The origins of cerebral asymmetry: a review of evidence of behavioural and brain lateralization in fishes, reptiles and amphibians. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 22: 411–426.
4.
Bishop PO, Jeremy D, Lance JW (1953). The optic nerve: properties of a central tract. Journal of Physiology 121: 415–432.
5.
Borod JC, Cicero BA, Obler LK, Welkowitz J, Erhan HM, Santschi, C, et al. (1998). Right hemisphere emotional perception: evidence across multiple channels. Neuropsychology 12: 446–458.
6.
Braccini SN, Lambeth SP, Schapiro SJ, Fitch WT (2012). Eye preferences in captive chimpanzees. Animal Cognition 15: 971–978.
7.
Chanvallon S, Blois-Heulin C, de Latour PR, Lemasson A (2017). Spontaneous approaches to divers by free-ranging orcas (Oricinus orca): age- and sex- differences in exploratory behaviours and visual laterality. Scientific Reports 7: 10922.
8.
Chapelain AS, Blois-Heulin C (2009). Lateralization for visual processes: eye preference in Campbell’s monkeys (Cercopithecus c. campbelli). Animal Cognition 12: 11–19.
9.
Cole J (1957). Laterality in the use of the hand, foot, and eye in monkeys. Journal of Comparative Psychology 50: 296–299.
10.
Curcio CA, Sloan KR, Packer O, Hendrickson AE, Kalina RE (1987). Distribution of cones in human and monkey retina: individual variability and radial asymmetry. Science 236: 579–582.
11.
Davidson RJ (1995). Cerebral asymmetry, emotion, and affective style. In Brain Asymmetry (Davidson RJ, Hugdahl K, eds.), pp 361–387. Cambridge, MIT Press.
12.
de Latude M, Demange M, Bec P, Blois-Heulin C (2009). Visual laterality responses to different emotive stimuli by red-capped mangabeys, Cercocebus torquatus torquatus. Animal Cognition 12: 31–42.
13.
Demaree HA, Everhart E, Youngstrom EA, Harrison DW (2005). Brain lateralization of emotional processing: historical roots and a future incorporating “dominance.”. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews 4: 3–20.
14.
Farmer K, Krueger K, Byrne RW (2010). Visual laterality in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) interacting with humans. Animal Cognition 13: 229–238.
15.
Fitch WT, Braccini SN (2013). Primate laterality and the biology and evolution of human handedness: a review and synthesis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1288: 70–85.
16.
Frasnelli E, Vallortigara G, Rogers LJ (2012). Left-right asymmetries of behaviour and nervous system in invertebrates. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 36: 1273–1291.
17.
Ghirlanda S, Frasnelli E, Vallortigara G (2009). Intraspecific competition and coordination in the evolution of lateralization. Philsophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 364: 861–866.
18.
Güntürkun O, Kesch S (1987). Visual lateralization during feeding in pigeons. Behavioural Neuroscience 101: 433–435.
19.
Hook-Costigan MA, Rogers LJ (1995). Hand, mouth and eye preferences in the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus). Folia Primatologica 64: 180–191.
20.
Hook-Costigan MA, Rogers LJ (1998). Eye preferences in common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus): influence of age, stimulus, and hand preference. Laterality 3: 109–130.
21.
Hopkins WD (2007). The Evolution of Hemispheric Specialization in Primates. San Diego, Academic Press.
22.
Hopkins WD, Bard KA (1993). Hemispheric specialization in infant chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): evidence for a relation with gender and arousal. Developmental Psychobiology 26: 219–235.
23.
Hopkins WD, Bard KA (2000). A longitudinal study of hand preference in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Developmental Psychobiology 36: 292–300.
24.
Hopkins WD, Bennett AJ (1994). Handedness and approach-avoiding behavior in chimpanzees (Pan). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes 20: 413–418.
25.
Jeffery G (2001). Architecture of the optic chiasm and the mechanisms that sculpt its development. Psychological Review 81: 1393–1414.
26.
Jennings JAM, Charman WN (1981). Off-axis image quality in the human eye. Vision Research 21: 445–455.
27.
Karenina KA, Giljov AN, Malashichev YB (2013). Eye as a key element of conspecific image eliciting lateralized response in fish. Animal Cognition 16: 287–300.
28.
Kounin JS (1938). Laterality in monkeys. The Pedagogical Seminary and Journal of Genetic Psychology 52: 375–393.
29.
Leliveld LMC, Langbein J, Puppe B (2013). The emergence of emotional lateralization: evidence in non-human vertebrates and implications for farm animals. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 145: 1–14.
30.
Levy J (1977). The mammalian brain and the adaptive advantage of cerebral asymmetry. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 299: 264–272.
31.
Lindell AK (2013). Continuities in emotion lateralization in human and non-human primates. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7: 464.
32.
Lustig A, Keter-Katz H, Katzir G (2012). Threat perception in the chameleon (Chamaeleo chameleon): evidence for lateralized eye use. Animal Cognition 15: 609–621.
33.
Maddess RJ (1975). Reaction time to hemiretinal stimulation. Neuropsychologia 13: 213–218.
34.
Martlnho III A, Burns ZT, von Bayern AMP, Kacelnlk A (2014). Monocular tool control, eye dominance, and laterality in New Caledonian crows. Current Biology 24: 2930–2934.
35.
Merigan WH, Katz LM (1990). Spatial resolution across the macaque retina. Vision Research 30: 985–991.
36.
Nedellec-Bienvenue, D, Blois-Heulin C (2005). Eye preferences in red-capped mangabeys. Folia Primatologica 76: 234–237.
37.
Packer O, Hendrickson AE, Curcio CA (1989). Photoreceptor topography of the retina in the adult pigtail macaque (Macaca nemestrina). Journal of Comparative Neurology 288: 165–183.
38.
Piddington T, Rogers LJ (2013). Strength of hand preference and dual task performance by common marmosets. Animal Cognition 16: 127–135.
39.
Porac C, Coren S (1981). Lateral Preferences and Human Behavior. New York, Springer.
40.
Robins A, Rogers LJ (2004). Lateralized prey-catching responses in the cane toad, Bufo marinus: analysis of complex visual stimuli. Animal Behaviour 68: 767–775.
41.
Rogers LJ (1997). Early experiential effects on laterality: research on chicks has relevance to other species. Laterality 2: 199–219.
42.
Rogers LJ, Andrew RJ (2002). Comparative Vertebrate Lateralization. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
43.
Rogers LJ, Anson JM (1979). Lateralization of function in the chicken forebrain. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 10: 679–686.
44.
Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G (2017). Lateralized Brain Functions: Methods in Human and Non-human Species. Neuromethods, Vol 122. New York, Humana Press.
45.
Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G, Andrew RJ (2013). Divided Brains: The Biology and Behaviour of Brain Asymmetries. New York, Cambridge University Press.
46.
Rogers LJ, Ward JP, Stafford D (1994). Eye dominance in the small-eared bushbaby, Otolemur garnettii. Neuropsychologia 32: 257–264.
47.
Rogers LJ, Zucca P, Vallortigara G (2004). Advantage of having a lateralized brain. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 271: S420–S422.
48.
Rosa Salva O, Regolin L, Mascalzoni E, Vallortigara G (2012). Cerebral and behavioural asymmetry in animal social recognition. Comparative Cognition and Behavior Reviews 7: 110–138.
49.
Rutherford HJV, Lindell AK (2011). Thriving and surviving: approach and avoidance motivation and lateralization. Emotion Review 3: 333–343.
50.
Sherman GF, Garbanati JA, Rosen GD, Yutzey DA, Denenberg VH (1980). Brain and behavioral asymmetries for spatial preference in rats. Brain Research 192: 61–67.
51.
Sovrano VA, Dadda M, Bisazza A (2005). Lateralized fish perform better than nonlateralized fish in spatial reorientation tasks. Behavioural Brain Research 163: 122–127.
52.
Vallortigara G (2000). Comparative neuropsychology of the dual brain: a stroll through animals’ left and right perceptual worlds. Brain and Language 73: 189–219.
53.
Ward JP, Hopkins WD (1993). Primate Laterality: Current Behavioral Evidence of Primate Asymmetries. Berlin, Springer.
54.
Wässle H, Grünert U, Röhrenbeck J, Boycott BB (1990). Retinal ganglion cell density and cortical magnification factor in the primate. Vision Research 30: 1897–1911.
55.
Westergaard GC, Suomi SJ (1996). Lateral bias for rotational behavior in tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Journal of Comparative Psychology 110: 199–202.
56.
Wikler KC, Williams RW, Rakic P (1990). Photoreceptor mosaic: number and distribution of rods and cones in the rhesus monkey retina. Journal of Comparative Neurology 297: 499–508.
57.
Wilder HD, Grünert U, Lee BB, Martin PR (1996). Topography of ganglion cells and photoreceptors in the retina of the new world monkey: the marmoset Callithrix jacchus. Visual Neuroscience 13: 335–352.
58.
Wilson DA, Tomonaga M, Vick SJ (2016). Eye preference in capuchin monkeys (Sapajus apella). Primates 57: 433–440.
59.
Wiper ML (2017). Evolutionary and mechanistic drivers of laterality: a review and new synthesis. Laterality 22: 740–770.
60.
Zhao DP, Gao X, Li BG (2010). Hand preference for spontaneously unimanual and bimanual coordinated tasks in wild Sichuan snub-nosed monkeys: implication for hemispheric specialization. Behavioural Brain Research 208: 85–89.
61.
Zhao DP, Gao X, Li BG, Watanabe K (2008d). First wild evidence of neonate nipple preference and maternal cradling laterality in Old World monkeys: a preliminary study from Rhinopithecus roxellana. Behavioural Processes 77: 364–368.
62.
Zhao DP, Hopkins WD, Li BG (2012). Handedness in nature: first evidence of manual laterality on bimanual coordinated tube task in wild primates. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 148: 36–44.
63.
Zhao DP, Ji WH, Li BG, Watanabe K (2008b). Mate competition and reproductive correlates of female dispersal in a polygynous primate species (Rhinopithecus roxellana). Behavioural Processes 79: 165–170.
64.
Zhao DP, Li BG (2009). Do deposed adult male Sichuan snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus roxellana) roam as solitary bachelors or continue to interact with former band members? Current Zoology 55: 235–237.
65.
Zhao DP, Li BG (2013). Footedness from a spontaneously bipedal posture of Sichuan snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus roxellana) in the Qinling Mountains. Acta Theriologica Sinica 33: 1–6.
66.
Zhao DP, Li BG, Grove CP, Watanabe K (2008a). Impact of male takeover on intra-unit sexual interactions and subsequent interbirth interval of wild Rhinopithecus roxellana. Folia Primatologica 79: 93–102.
67.
Zhao DP, Li BS, Li BG (2019). Postural effect on manual laterality during grooming in northern white-cheeked gibbons (Nomascus leucogenys). Zoological Research 40: 449–455.
68.
Zhao DP, Li BS, Li BG (2020). How target animacy affects manual laterality in hylobatidae: the first evidence in northern white-cheeked gibbons (Nomascus leucogenys). Folia Primatologica 91: 445-451.
69.
Zhao DP, Li BG, Watanabe K (2008e). First evidence on foot preference during locomotion in Old World monkeys: a study of quadrupedal and bipedal actions in Sichuan snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus roxellana). Primates 49: 260–264.
70.
Zhao DP, Li BG, Watanabe K (2011). Impact of group size on female reproductive success of free-ranging Rhinopithecus roxellana in the Qinling Mountains, China. Folia Primatologica 82: 1–12.
71.
Zhao DP, Tian XL, Liu XC, Chen ZY, Li BG (2016). Effect of target animacy on hand preference in Sichuan snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus roxellana). Animal Cognition 19: 977–985.
72.
Zhao DP, Wang Y, Han KJ, Zhang HB, Li BG (2015). Does target animacy influence manual laterality of monkeys? first answer from northern pig-tailed macaques (Macaca leonina). Animal Cognition 18: 931–936.
© 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel
2020
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.