Experimental evidence suggests that females would prefer males with better cognitive abilities as mates. However, little is known about the traits reflecting enhanced cognitive skills on which females might base their mate-choice decisions. In particular, it has been suggested that male foraging performance could be used as an indicator of cognitive capacity, but convincing evidence for this hypothesis is still lacking. In the present study, we investigated whether female zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) modify their mating preferences after having observed the performance of males on a problem-solving task. Specifically, we measured the females’ preferences between two males once before and once after an observation period, during which their initially preferred male was incapable of solving the task contrary to their initially less-preferred male. We also conducted a control treatment to test whether the shift in female preferences was attributable to differences between the two stimulus males in their foraging efficiency. Finally, we assessed each bird’s performance in a color associative task to check whether females can discriminate among males based on their learning speed. We found that females significantly increased their preference toward the most efficient male in both treatments. Yet, there was no difference between the two treatments and we found no evidence that females assess male cognitive ability indirectly via morphological traits. Thus, our results suggest that females would not use the males’ problem-solving performance as an indicator of general cognitive ability to gain indirect fitness benefits (i.e., good genes) but rather to assess their foraging efficiency and gain direct benefits.
Individuals within the same population generally differ among each other not only in their behavioral traits but also in their level of behavioral plasticity (i.e., in their propensity to modify their behavior in response to changing conditions). If the proximate factors underlying individual differences in behavioral plasticity were the same for any measure of plasticity, as commonly assumed, one would expect plasticity to be repeatable across behaviors and contexts. However, this assumption remains largely untested. Here, we conducted an experiment with sailfin mollies (Poecilia latipinna) whose behavioral plasticity was estimated both as the change in their personality traits or mating behavior across a social gradient and using their performance on a reversal-learning task. We found that the correlations between pairwise measures of plasticity were weak and non-significant, thus indicating that the most plastic individuals were not the same in all the tests. This finding might arise because either individuals adjust the magnitude of their behavioral responses depending on the benefits of plasticity, and/or individuals expressing high behavioral plasticity in one context are limited by neural and/or physiological constraints in the amount of plasticity they can express in other contexts. Because the repeatability of behavioral plasticity may have important evolutionary consequences, additional studies are needed to assess the importance of trade-offs between conflicting selection pressures on the maintenance of intra-individual variation in behavioral plasticity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.