Persistence associated with extractive foraging explains variation in innovation in Darwin’s finches

IF 2.5 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Paula Ibáñez de Aldecoa, Sabine Tebbich, Andrea S Griffin
{"title":"Persistence associated with extractive foraging explains variation in innovation in Darwin’s finches","authors":"Paula Ibáñez de Aldecoa, Sabine Tebbich, Andrea S Griffin","doi":"10.1093/beheco/arad090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The capacity to create new behaviors is influenced by environmental factors such as foraging ecology, which can lead to phylogenetic variation in innovativeness. Alternatively, these differences may arise due to the selection of the underlying mechanisms, collaterally affecting innovativeness. To understand the evolutionary pathways that might enhance innovativeness, we examined the role of diet breadth and degree of extractive foraging, as well as a range of intervening cognitive and behavioral mechanisms (neophilia, neophobia, flexibility, motivation, and persistence). Darwin’s finches are very suitable to this purpose: the clade is composed of closely related species that vary in their feeding habits and capacity to develop food innovations. Using a multi-access box, we conducted an interspecies comparison on innovative problem-solving between two diet specialists, extractive foragers (woodpecker and cactus finch), and two diet generalists, non-extractive foragers (small and medium ground finch). We predicted that if extractive foraging was associated with high innovativeness, variation would be best explained by species differences in persistence and motivation, whereas if diet generalism was the main driver, then variation would be due to differences in flexibility and responses to novelty. We found a faster capacity to innovate and a higher persistence for extractive foragers, suggesting that persistence might be adaptive to extractive foraging and only secondarily to innovation. Our findings also show that diet generalism and some variables linking it to innovation were unrelated to innovativeness and call for the development of joint experimental approaches that capture the diversity of factors giving rise to novel behaviors.","PeriodicalId":8840,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Ecology","volume":"38 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arad090","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The capacity to create new behaviors is influenced by environmental factors such as foraging ecology, which can lead to phylogenetic variation in innovativeness. Alternatively, these differences may arise due to the selection of the underlying mechanisms, collaterally affecting innovativeness. To understand the evolutionary pathways that might enhance innovativeness, we examined the role of diet breadth and degree of extractive foraging, as well as a range of intervening cognitive and behavioral mechanisms (neophilia, neophobia, flexibility, motivation, and persistence). Darwin’s finches are very suitable to this purpose: the clade is composed of closely related species that vary in their feeding habits and capacity to develop food innovations. Using a multi-access box, we conducted an interspecies comparison on innovative problem-solving between two diet specialists, extractive foragers (woodpecker and cactus finch), and two diet generalists, non-extractive foragers (small and medium ground finch). We predicted that if extractive foraging was associated with high innovativeness, variation would be best explained by species differences in persistence and motivation, whereas if diet generalism was the main driver, then variation would be due to differences in flexibility and responses to novelty. We found a faster capacity to innovate and a higher persistence for extractive foragers, suggesting that persistence might be adaptive to extractive foraging and only secondarily to innovation. Our findings also show that diet generalism and some variables linking it to innovation were unrelated to innovativeness and call for the development of joint experimental approaches that capture the diversity of factors giving rise to novel behaviors.
与采掘性觅食有关的持久性解释了达尔文雀的创新变异
创新能力受到觅食生态等环境因素的影响,从而导致创新能力的系统发育差异。或者,这些差异可能是由于潜在机制的选择而产生的,附带影响创新。为了了解可能增强创新能力的进化途径,我们研究了饮食宽度和采掘觅食程度的作用,以及一系列干预的认知和行为机制(新事物偏好、新事物恐惧症、灵活性、动机和持久性)。达尔文的雀类非常适合这一目的:进化支由密切相关的物种组成,这些物种在摄食习惯和发展食物创新的能力方面各不相同。利用多通道箱,我们在两种饮食专家(采掘性觅食者(啄木鸟和仙人掌雀))和两种饮食通才(非采掘性觅食者(中小型地雀))之间进行了创新问题解决的种间比较。我们预测,如果采掘觅食与高度创新有关,那么变异最好用物种在持久性和动机方面的差异来解释,而如果饮食普遍性是主要驱动因素,那么变异将是由于灵活性和对新颖性的反应的差异。我们发现,采掘式觅食者具有更快的创新能力和更高的持久性,这表明持久性可能是采掘式觅食的适应性,仅次于创新。我们的研究结果还表明,饮食通用性和一些与创新相关的变量与创新无关,需要开发联合实验方法,以捕捉导致新行为的因素的多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Behavioral Ecology
Behavioral Ecology 环境科学-动物学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
93
审稿时长
3.0 months
期刊介绍: Studies on the whole range of behaving organisms, including plants, invertebrates, vertebrates, and humans, are included. Behavioral Ecology construes the field in its broadest sense to include 1) the use of ecological and evolutionary processes to explain the occurrence and adaptive significance of behavior patterns; 2) the use of behavioral processes to predict ecological patterns, and 3) empirical, comparative analyses relating behavior to the environment in which it occurs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信