|
Ruid, D. B., Paul, W. J., Roell, B. J., Wydeven, A. P., Willging, R. C., Jurewicz, R. L., et al. (2009). Wolf-Human Conflicts and Management in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. In A. P. Wydeven, T. R. Van Deelen, & E. J. Heske (Eds.), Recovery of Gray Wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States: An Endangered Species Success Story (pp. 279–295). New York, NY: Springer New York.
|
|
|
Sol, D. (2003). Behavioural flexibility: a neglected issue in the ecological and evolutionary literature. In S. M. Reader and K. N. Laland (Ed.), Animal innovation. (pp. 63–82). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
|
Lee, P. C. (2003). Innovation as a behavioural response to environmental challenges. In S. M. Reader and K. N. Laland (Ed.), Animal Innovation (pp. 261–279). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
|
Laland, K. N., & van Bergen, Y. (2003). Experimental studies of innovation in the guppy. Animal Innovation, , 155–174.
|
|
|
Greenberg, R. (2003). The role of neophobia and neophilia in the development of innovative behavour in birds. In S. M. Reader and K. N. Laland (Ed.), Animal Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
|
Reader, S. M., & MacDonald, K. (2003). Environmental variability and primate behavioural flexibiity. In S. M. Reader, & K. L. Laland (Eds.), Animal Innovation (pp. 83–116). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
|
Byrne R.W. (1994). The evolution of intelligence. In P.J.B. Slater and T.R. Halliday (Ed.), Behaviour and Evolution (pp. 223–265). Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
Reinhardt, I., Kluth, G., Balzer, S., & Steyer, K. (2022). Wolfsverursachte Schäden, Präventions- und Ausgleichszahlungen in Deutschland 2021 (Markus Ritz, Ed.) (Vol. 41). Görlitz, Deutschland: DBBW-Dokumentations- und Beratungsstelle des Bundes zum Thema Wolf.
|
|
|
Irving-Pease, E. K., Ryan, H., Jamieson, A., Dimopoulos, E. A., Larson, G., & Frantz, L. A. F. (2019). Paleogenomics of Animal Domestication. In C. Lindqvist, & O. P. Rajora (Eds.), Paleogenomics: Genome-Scale Analysis of Ancient DNA (pp. 225–272). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Abstract: Starting with dogs, over 15,000 years ago, the domestication of animals has been central in the development of modern societies. Because of its importance for a range of disciplines – including archaeology, biology and the humanities – domestication has been studied extensively. This chapter reviews how the field of paleogenomics has revolutionised, and will continue to revolutionise, our understanding of animal domestication. We discuss how the recovery of ancient DNA from archaeological remains is allowing researchers to overcome inherent shortcomings arising from the analysis of modern DNA alone. In particular, we show how DNA, extracted from ancient substrates, has proven to be a crucial source of information to reconstruct the geographic and temporal origin of domestic species. We also discuss how ancient DNA is being used by geneticists and archaeologists to directly observe evolutionary changes linked to artificial and natural selection to generate a richer understanding of this fascinating process.
|
|
|
Marinsek, N. L., Gazzaniga, M. S., & Miller, M. B. (2016). Chapter 17 – Split-Brain, Split-Mind. In S. Laureys, O. Gosseries, & G. Tononi (Eds.), The Neurology of Conciousness (Second Edition) (pp. 271–279). San Diego: Academic Press.
Abstract: The corpus callosum anatomically and functionally connects the two cerebral hemispheres. Despite its important role in interhemispheric communication however, severing the corpus callosum produces few--if any--noticeable cognitive or behavioral abnormalities. Incredibly, split-brain patients do not report any drastic changes in their conscious experience even though nearly all interhemispheric communication ceases after surgery. Extensive research has shown that both hemispheres remain conscious following disconnection and the conscious experience of each hemisphere is private and independent of the other. Additionally, the conscious experiences of the hemispheres appear to be qualitatively different, such that the consciousness of the left hemisphere is more enriched than the right. In this chapter, we offer explanations as to why split-brain patients feel unified despite possessing dual conscious experiences and discuss how the divided consciousness of split-brain patients can inform current theories of consciousness.
|
|