|
|
Anderson, J. R., Fornasieri, I., Ludes, E., & Roeder, J. - J. (1992). Social processes and innovative behaviour in changing groups of lemur fulvus. Behav. Process., 27(2), 101–112.
Abstract: A group of brown lemurs was presented with one or two baited food-boxes requiring a specific type of motor response in order to be opened. Subsequently, four groups containing different combinations of experienced individuals from the original group and naive individuals were tested. Solutions to the problem and access to the food were recorded and considered in relation to social factors. In the original group, two adult males learned to open the boxes, with one male increasingly preventing the other from approaching. In the second group, with the subordinate male and certain females removed, the dominant male tolerated successful performances by a juvenile female. Group 3 consisted of three passive female participants from the original group and a naive female; one of the three original females now became the sole box-opener. The introduction of the subordinate male from the original group into the all-female group led to a sharing of box-opening by this subject and the skilled female. In the final group, intense aggression toward the skilled female by a new, naive adult male resulted in two previously passive females succeeding on some occasions. In lemurs, at least some `scroungers' appear able to learn to perform a new act when the social context permits.
|
|
|
|
Allcroft, D. J., Tolkamp, B. J., Glasbey, C. A., & Kyriazakis, I. (2004). The importance of `memory' in statistical models for animal feeding behaviour. Behav. Process., 67(1), 99–109.
Abstract: We investigate models for animal feeding behaviour, with the aim of improving understanding of how animals organise their behaviour in the short term. We consider three classes of model: hidden Markov, latent Gaussian and semi-Markov. Each can predict the typical `clustered' feeding behaviour that is generally observed, however they differ in the extent to which `memory' of previous behaviour is allowed to affect future behaviour. The hidden Markov model has `lack of memory', the current behavioural state being dependent on the previous state only. The latent Gaussian model assumes feeding/non-feeding periods to occur by the thresholding of an underlying continuous variable, thereby incorporating some `short-term memory'. The semi-Markov model, by taking into account the duration of time spent in the previous state, can be said to incorporate `longer-term memory'. We fit each of these models to a dataset of cow feeding behaviour. We find the semi-Markov model (longer-term memory) to have the best fit to the data and the hidden Markov model (lack of memory) the worst. We argue that in view of effects of satiety on short-term feeding behaviour of animal species in general, biologically suitable models should allow `memory' to play a role. We conclude that our findings are equally relevant for the analysis of other types of short-term behaviour that are governed by satiety-like principles.
|
|
|
|
Abeyesinghe, S. M., Nicol, C. J., Wathes. C.M., & Randall, J. M. (2001). Development of a raceway method to assess aversion of domestic fowl to concurrent stressors. Behav. Process., 56(3), 175–194.
Abstract: The requirement for assessing the effects of stressor combinations in improving the welfare of animals has not been widely recognised. Knowledge of the effects of concurrent stressors is needed to improve environments such as transport, where animals are presented with many simultaneous challenges. However, no method for measuring the effects of different stressors with a common unit is currently available. A locomotor passive avoidance method was developed as a common currency measure of the aversion of domestic fowl to concurrent stressors, using vibrational and thermal stressors as an exemplar. Juvenile fowl, fasted overnight, were trained to run a raceway into a goal-box for small food rewards (FR1). When running consistently, the reinforcement schedule was superimposed with a FR5 treatment schedule (60 min confinement in the goal-box with either a control of no other stressors [N] or concurrent vibration and thermal stressors [VT]). Subsequent latency to return to the goal-box was recorded as a measure of aversion. The factors affecting bird response were addressed in a series of experiments to optimise the method and clarify interpretation of results. Pre-feeding (20% ration 2 h prior to testing) did not affect response, but increasing the number of treatment presentations facilitated learning and increased method sensitivity. Treatment responses were consistent across experiments; overall VT was avoided (P<0.001), but N was not. However, there was large individual variation in response to VT. A final experiment indicated that, given a visual discriminatory cue, birds were capable of learning the required association between entering the goal-box and receiving the treatment, suggesting that the delay responses were due to aversion rather than the immediate impact of treatment on ability to respond. Further work is required to test the singular stressors, but the method retains common currency potential for assessing aversion to multiple stressors.
|
|
