| Home | [11–20] << 21 >> |
|
Valero, N. (2003). West Nile virus: a new challenge? Invest Clin, 44(3), 175–177.
Abstract: West Nile Virus (WNV), a member of the family Flaviviridae, was first isolated in 1937. Since the original isolation of the WNV outbreaks have occurred with increase in frequency of cases in humans and horses, apparent increase in severe human disease and high avian death rates. In 1999, 2000 and 2002 outbreaks of the WNV encephalitis were reported in horses, birds and humans from New York and Canada. Ornithophilic mosquitoes are the principal vectors of the WNV and birds of several species chiefly migrants appear to be the major introductory or amplifying host. The pattern of outbreaks in the old and new world suggests that viremic migratory birds may also contribute to movement of the virus. If so, Central America, Caribbean Islands and countries of South America including Venezuela, are in potential risk for suffering a severe outbreak for WNV, since several species of birds have populations that pass trough New York and cross the western north Atlantic or Caribbean Sea. It is important the knowledge of the ecology of WNV as well of the efficacy of control efforts in order to minimize the public health impact in these countries, where all population is susceptible to this infection.
Keywords: Animal Migration; Animals; Bird Diseases/virology; Birds; Caribbean Region; Central America; Culex/virology; Horse Diseases/virology; Horses; Humans; Insect Vectors/virology; North America/epidemiology; South America; West Nile Fever/*epidemiology/transmission/veterinary; West Nile virus/*physiology
|
|
Nakamaru, M., & Sasaki, A. (2003). Can transitive inference evolve in animals playing the hawk-dove game? J. Theor. Biol., 222(4), 461–470.
Abstract: What should an individual do if there are no reliable cues to the strength of a competitor when fighting with it for resources? We herein examine the evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) in the hawk-dove game, if the opponent's resource-holding potential (RHP) can only indirectly be inferred from the outcome of past interactions in the population. The strategies we examined include the classical mixed strategy in which no information on past games is utilized, the `imprinting' strategy in which a player increases/decreases its aggressiveness if it wins/loses a game, the `immediate inference' strategy in which a player can infer the strength of those opponents it fought before, and the `transitive inference' strategy in which a player can infer the strength of a new opponent through a third party with which both players have fought before. Invasibility analysis for each pair of strategies revealed that (i) the transitive-inference strategy can always invade the mixed strategy and the imprinting strategy, and itself refuses invasion by these strategies; (ii) the largest advantage for transitive inference is achieved when the number of games played per individual in one generation is small and when the cost of losing an escalated game is large; (iii) the immediate inference, rather than the transitive inference, can be an ESS if the cost of fighting is small; (iv) a strong linear ranking is established in the population of transitive-inference strategists, though it does not perfectly correlate to the ranking by actual RHPs. We found that the advantage of the transitive inference is not in its ability to correct a misassessment (it is actually the worst in doing so), but in the ability of quickly lining up either incorrect or correct assessments to form a linear dominance hierarchy.
Keywords: Hawk-dove game; Ess; Transitive inference; Resource holding potential
|
|
Clement, T. S., & Zentall, T. R. (2003). Choice based on exclusion in pigeons. Psychon Bull Rev, 10(4), 959–964.
Abstract: When humans acquire a conditional discrimination and are given a novel-sample-comparison choice, they often reject a comparison known to be associated with a different sample and choose the alternative comparison by default (or by exclusion). In Experiment 1, we found that if, following matching training, we replaced both of the samples, acquisition took five times longer than if we replaced only one of the samples. Apparently, the opportunity to reject one of the comparisons facilitated the association of the other sample with the remaining comparison. In Experiment 2, we first trained pigeons to treat two samples differently (to associate Sample A with Comparison 1 and Sample B with Comparison 2) and then trained them to associate one of those samples with a new comparison (e.g., Sample A with Comparison 3) and to associate a novel sample (Sample C) with a different, new comparison (Comparison 4). When Sample B then replaced Sample C, the pigeons showed a significant tendency to choose Comparison 4 over Comparison 3. Thus, when given the opportunity, pigeons will choose by exclusion.
|