> The question the turning test was posed to solve is when does a sufficiently smart computer become sapient.

Yes, but it's a test for humans to interpret and judge. What kind of nonsense is it to think it should be used for an animal? A possibly sentient computer is going to be programmed to communicate in one of the human languages for obvious reasons, and animals don't have that luxury. I can't see why you would think a Turing test would be relevant to a discussion of animal sapience at all.

> What on earth is your "standard" definition of sapience?

Whatever Merriam-Webster or Oxford give.