Challenges of Learning to Escape Evolutionary Traps

Abstract

Many animals respond well behaviorally to stimuli associated with human-induced rapid environmental change (HIREC), such as novel predators or food sources. Yet others make errors and succumb to evolutionary traps: approaching or even preferring low quality, dangerous or toxic options, avoiding beneficial stimuli, or wasting resources responding to stimuli with neutral payoffs. A common expectation is that learning should help animals adjust to HIREC; however, learning is not always expected or even favored in many scenarios that expose animals to ecological and evolutionary traps. We propose a conceptual framework that aims to explain variation in when learning can help animals avoid and escape traps caused by HIREC. We first clarify why learning to correct two main types of errors (avoiding beneficial options and approaching detrimental options) might be difficult (limited by constraints). We then identify and discuss several key behavioral mechanisms (adaptive sampling, generalization, habituation, reversal learning) that can be targeted to help animals learn to avoid traps. Finally, we discuss how individual differences in neophobia/neophilia and personality relate to learning in the context of HIREC traps, and offer some general guidance for disarming traps. Given how devastating traps can be for animal populations, any breakthrough in mitigating trap outcomes via learning could make the difference in developing effective solutions.

Cognition in a Changing World: Red-Headed Gouldian Finches Enter Spatially Unfamiliar Habitats More Readily Than Do Black-Headed Birds

“…Cognitive biases consistently guide how animals make often imperfect assessments of their environment (Marshall et al, 2013) and are, therefore, instrumental in understanding responses to habitat change and the downstream effects on survival. This is especially true when animals are faced with evolutionarily novel conditions because their responses and decisions may not be easy to predict without considering underlying perceptual abilities and learning tendencies (Greggor et al, 2019).…”

The Role of Animal Cognition in Human-Wildlife Interactions

“…Variation in responses to humans may arise if animals differ in their perception of cues, their previous experience and/or their behavioral decision-making processes ( Sih et al, 2011 ; see previous sections). Variation can arise at each of these stages: for example, while animals may perceive relevant cues and classify them in a similar way, differences in prior experience may result in behavioral variation ( Sih et al, 2011 ; Greggor et al, 2014 , 2019 ). Firstly, an animal’s response to a cue is likely to depend on the specificity of the cue itself, and how reliably it predicts a particular outcome ( Shettleworth, 2010 ).…”

“…For example, wild animals may be more likely to attend to human gaze cues if they frequently attend to the gaze direction of conspecifics (see Davidson et al, 2014 for a discussion), or they may employ social learning to avoid dangerous people if they rely heavily on social learning in other contexts. Additionally, individual-level factors such as personality, response to novelty, reproductive state and previous experience also influence how individuals use information from their environment ( Sih and Del Giudice, 2012 ; Greggor et al, 2017 , 2019 ; Figure 1 ), and are therefore likely to contribute to decision-making during encounters with people. Although there is growing interest in how cognitive variation influences responses to human-induced rapid environmental change in general (e.g., Greggor et al, 2014 , 2019 ; Barrett et al, 2019 ), relatively few studies have focused specifically on the role of cognition in determining how animals respond to humans themselves.…”

“…Cognitive research can provide an important tool in mitigating the impacts of human-wildlife interactions ( Greggor et al, 2014 , 2019 ; Barrett et al, 2019 ). Understanding how animals perceive and respond to humans can be used to limit impacts on wildlife populations by creating spatial or temporal “buffer zones” ( Rodríguez-Prieto and Fernández-Juricic, 2005 ; Mallord et al, 2007 ; Gaynor et al, 2018 ); encouraging establishment in high-quality habitat ( Gilroy and Sutherland, 2007 ; Greggor et al, 2019 ); or identifying the factors causing some species or individuals to exploit anthropogenic food sources ( Swan et al, 2017 ; Barrett et al, 2019 ). A conceptual framework developed by Greggor et al (2014) outlines how the problems caused by human-induced rapid environmental change can be mitigated by identifying the relevant perceptual and cognitive mechanisms underlying behavior.…”

Table_4.DOCX

“…Consistent behavior modifications across different urban stimuli (i.e., behavioral syndromes such as increased boldness) can likewise impact mortality risk (Luttbeg and Sih, 2010). Each of the three types of adaptation (acclimatory, regulatory, developmental) offer useful clues as to how the urban environment affects mammal populations and how it may drive evolutionary change (Miranda et al, 2013;McDonnell and Hahs, 2015;Greggor et al, 2019). As such, increased research on behaviors that reflect a broader array of regulatory and developmental adaptions will result in a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms behind urban mammal behavior change.…”