Unpacking the navigation toolbox: insights from comparative cognition.

The study of navigation is informed by ethological data from many species, laboratory investigation at behavioural and neurobiological levels, and computational modelling. However, the data are often species-specific, making it challenging to develop general models of how biology supports behaviour. Wiener et al. outlined a framework for organizing the results across taxa, called the 'navigation toolbox' (Wiener et al. In Animal thinking: contemporary issues in comparative cognition (eds R Menzel, J Fischer), pp. 51-76). This framework proposes that spatial cognition is a hierarchical process in which sensory inputs at the lowest level are successively combined into ever-more complex representations, culminating in a metric or quasi-metric internal model of the world (cognitive map). Some animals, notably humans, also use symbolic representations to produce an external representation, such as a verbal description, signpost or map that allows communication of spatial information or instructions between individuals. Recently, new discoveries have extended our understanding of how spatial representations are constructed, highlighting that the hierarchical relationships are bidirectional, with higher levels feeding back to influence lower levels. In the light of these new developments, we revisit the navigation toolbox, elaborate it and incorporate new findings. The toolbox provides a common framework within which the results from different taxa can be described and compared, yielding a more detailed, mechanistic and generalized understanding of navigation.

The mosaic structure of the mammalian cognitive map.

The cognitive map, proposed by Tolman in the 1940s, is a hypothetical internal representation of space constructed by the brain to enable an animal to undertake flexible spatial behaviors such as navigation. The subsequent discovery of place cells in the hippocampus of rats suggested that such a map-like representation does exist, and also provided a tool with which to explore its properties. Single-neuron studies in rodents conducted in small singular spaces have suggested that the map is founded on a metric framework, preserving distances and directions in an abstract representational format. An open question is whether this metric structure pertains over extended, often complexly structured real-world space. The data reviewed here suggest that this is not the case. The emerging picture is that instead of being a single, unified construct, the map is a mosaic of fragments that are heterogeneous, variably metric, multiply scaled, and sometimes laid on top of each other. Important organizing factors within and between fragments include boundaries, context, compass direction, and gravity. The map functions not to provide a comprehensive and precise rendering of the environment but rather to support adaptive behavior, tailored to the species and situation.