Abstract: This paper describes current work on the causal analysis of behaviour systems. It is noted that while causal work investigating the neural, hormonal, and genetic bases of behaviour is flourishing, work being conducted at a strictly behavioural level of analysis has declined greatly over the past 40 years. Nonetheless, most recent research on animal cognition and applied ethology is still being carried out at a behavioural level of analysis and examples of both types of research are presented: memory mechanisms of food-storing birds and decisions of spider-eating jumping spiders, as well as feather pecking in fowl and animal welfare issues, are all briefly discussed. Finally, I discuss the similarities between neural network modelling and early ethological models of motivation, and then show how a modern version of Lorenz's model of motivation can account for current research findings on dustbathing in chickens and sleep in humans. I conclude that valuable information can still be obtained by research at a behavioural level of analysis.

Abstract: The four questions that Niko Tinbergen identified for behavioural biology ? evolution, function, development and causation ? are all important and should be studied in their own right. Recently, there has been a debate as to whether these four questions should be investigated separately or whether they should be integrated. Integration of the four questions has been attempted in novel research disciplines such as cognitive ecology, evolutionary psychology and neuroecology. Euan Macphail and I have criticised these integrative approaches, suggesting that they are fundamentally flawed as they confound function and mechanism. Investigating the function or evolutionary history of a behaviour or cognitive system is important and entirely legitimate. However, such investigations cannot provide us with answers to questions about the mechanisms underlying behaviour or cognition. At most, functional or evolutionary considerations can provide clues that may be useful for a causal analysis of the underlying mechanisms. However, these clues can be misleading and are often wrong, as is illustrated with examples from song learning and food storing in birds. After summarising the main issues in the neuroecology debate, I discuss some misunderstandings that were apparent in the responses to our critique, as well as some recent relevant data. Recent results do not support the neuroecological approach. Finally, I suggest that the way forward is a cautious and critical use of functional and evolutionary clues in the study of the mechanisms of behaviour.

Abstract: This study investigated behavioral signals of estrus by systematically monitoring the interactions of one male with four female African elephants housed in a naturalistic outdoor enclosure at Disney's Animal Kingdom over a period of 11 months. We measured changes in five spatial behaviors and 22 tactile-contact behaviors, as well as changes in serum progestagen and LH concentrations, across three ovarian cycles for each female. Two females did not cycle during the study. Three different phases of the ovarian cycle were identified: mid luteal, anovulatory follicular, ovulatory follicular. The male followed more and carried out more genital inspections, flehmen, and trunk-to-mouth behaviors toward cycling females during their ovulatory phase. Genital inspections by the male peaked above baseline levels on the day of an LH surge, and up to 9 days before, in both cycling females and, thus, might be a useful behavioral index of estrus. The male also carried out more genital inspections, flehmen, and trunk touches to the back leg toward ovulatory cycling than noncycling females. Overall, our results indicated that: 1) a single subadult African elephant male could discriminate two females in the ovulatory phase of their cycle (i.e., during the 3 weeks preceding ovulation) from the mid luteal phase; 2) the male also discriminated two cycling females in the ovulatory and anovulatory follicular phases from two noncycling females; 3) two females in the ovulatory phase of the cycle displayed a greater variety of tactile-contact behavior toward the male compared to the other cycle phases. Zoo Biol 0:1-19, 2005. – 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.