|
|
Andrew, R. J., Osorio, D., & Budaev, S. (2009). Light during embryonic development modulates patterns of lateralization strongly and similarly in both zebrafish and chick. Phil. Trans. Biol. Sci., 364(1519), 983–989.
Abstract: Some aspects of lateralization are widespread. This is clear for the association between left-eye (LE) use and readiness to respond intensely to releasing stimuli presented by others, which has been found in representatives of all major groups of tetrapods and in fishes. In the chick, this behavioural asymmetry is linked developmentally to greater ability to sustain response against distracting stimuli with right-eye (RE) use, in that both reverse with the reversal of the normal RE exposure to light. In the zebrafish, the same two asymmetries (normally) have similar associations with the LE and the RE, and both also reverse together (owing to epithalamic reversal). Here, we show that light exposure early in development is needed in zebrafish to generate both asymmetries. Dark development largely abolishes both the enhanced abilities, confirming their linkage. Resemblance to the chick is increased by the survival in the chick, after dark development, of higher ability to assess familiarity of complex stimuli when using the LE. A somewhat similar ability survives in dark-developed zebrafish. Here, LE use causes lesser reliance on a single recent experience than on longer term past experience in the assessment of novelty. Such resemblances between a fish and a bird suggest that we should look not only for resemblances between different groups of vertebrates in the most common overall pattern of lateralization, but also for possible resemblances in the nature of inter-individual variation and in the way in which it is generated during development.
|
|
|
|
Vallortigara, G., & Andrew, R. J. (1994). Differential involvement of right and left hemisphere in individual recognition in the domestic chick. Behav. Process., 33(1-2), 41–57.
Abstract: Right hemisphere advantage in individual recognition (as shown by differences between response to strangers and companions) is clear in the domestic chick. Chicks using the left eye (and so, thanks to the complete optic decussation, predominantly the right hemisphere) discriminate between stranger and companion. Chicks using the right eye discriminate less clearly or not at all. The ability of left eyed chicks to respond to differences between strangers and companions stimuli is associated with a more general ability to detect and respond to novelty: this difference between left and right eyed chicks also holds for stimuli which are not social partners. The right hemisphere also shows advantage in tasks with a spatial component (topographical learning; response to change in the spatial context of a stimulus) in the chick, as in humans. Similar specialisations of the two hemispheres are also revealed in tests which involve olfactory cues presented by social partners. The special properties of the left hemisphere are less well established in the chick. Evidence reviewed here suggests that it tends to respond to selected properties of a stimulus and to use them to assign it to a category; such assignment then allows an appropriate response. When exposed to an imprinting stimulus (visual or auditory) a chick begins by using right eye or ear (suggesting left hemisphere control), and then shifts to the left eye or ear (suggesting right hemisphere control), as exposure continues. The left hemisphere here is thus involved whilst behaviour is dominated by vigorous response to releasing stimuli presented by an object. Subsequent learning about the full detailed properties of the stimulus, which is crucial for individual recognition, may explain the shift to right hemisphere control after prolonged exposure to the social stimulus. There is a marked sex difference in choice tests: females tend to choose companions in tests where males choose strangers. It is possible that this difference is specifically caused by stronger motivation to sustain social contact in female chicks, for which there is extensive evidence. However, sex differences in response to change in familiar stimuli are also marked in tests which do not involve social partners. Finally, in both sexes there are two periods during development in which there age-dependent shifts in bias to use one or other hemisphere. These periods (days 3-5 and 8-11) coincide with two major changes in the social behaviour of chicks reared by a hen in a normal brood. It is argued that one function of these periods is to bring fully into play the hemisphere most appropriate to the type of response to, and learning about, social partners which is needed at particular points in development. Parallels are discussed between the involvement of lateralised processes in the recognition of social partners in chicks and humans.
|
|
|
|
Andrew, R. J. (1974). Changes in visual responsiveness following intercollicular lesions and their effects on avoidance and attack. Brain Behav Evol, 10(4-5), 400–424.
Abstract: In the normal chick, conspicuous visual stimuli induce targetting and pecking together, with vocalization. All three are abolished by lesion of the intercollicular area (ICo) or of connections passing through its medial margin. After such lesions, chicks also cease to treat significant visual stimuli as if they were startling and exciting, and may delay response as a result. However, they are still able to recognise, orient accurately to, and respond appropriately to, a variety of complex visual stimuli (e.g. food grains, copulation object). In addition, they are little affected by strange surroundings. Lesion evidence suggests the mammalian subcollicular area to have similar functions to the ICo and to be homologous with it. A route (present in bird), which is well-known in mammals for its association with threat, defense and escape evoked by strange and frightening objects (amygdala-diencephalic periventricular system-central mesencephalic grey, A-DPS-CMG) is stimuli via the 2 ICo (subcollicular area). Two different mechanisms may be involved caudal to the ICo. One consists of tectal afferents which might modulate the evocation of targetting, pecking and other responses via the tectum. The other is the predorsal system of tectal efferents which may mediate such responses. Classical syndromes of tameness and unresponsiveness produced by various interruptions of the A-DPS-CMG route may depend on interruption of connections to these midbrain mechanisms. Attack is depressed by ICo lesions as one aspect of reduced responsiveness to conspicuous and startling visual stimuli. Avoidance, which is apparently mediated by a separate system, much as in Anura, is facilitated.
|
|
