Failure of food-aversion conditioning to suppress predatory attack of the grasshopper mouse, Onychomys leucogaster

Langley, William M.

doi:10.1016/s0163-1047(81)92084-7

Cited by 17 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, poisoned rats continued to exhibit predatory responses to the novel ball bearing, though they markedly reduced their ingestion of the novel food. However, there was a decline in the average duration of interaction with the novel bearing, supporting Langley's (1981) finding that poisoned grasshopper mice decreased the length of prey engagement though not frequency of contact. It may be that a decline in duration of contact following poisoning is mediated by the taste of the prey rather than by its appearance or movement.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 68%

“…Second, as in field research the rats showed rapid suppression of ingestion of a novel food following poisoning but no suppression of frequency of attack on the bearing predicting it. This dissociation of the determinants of ingestion and attack has been obtained frequently with natural prey (e.g., Baxter, 1979;Brett et al, 1976;Krames et al, 1973;Langley, 1981;Langley & Knapp, 1984;Rusiniak et al, 1976), and it is not surprising given that poisoning appears more readily associated with gustatory than with exteroceptive stimuli (e.g., . Ingestion is controlled largely by gustatory cues, whereas attack is typically controlled by exteroceptive cues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…The presence of both novel and familiar ball bearings and food allowed us to determine the extent to which avoidance of either predation or ingestion generalized to more familiar prey. If behavior in this simulation resembles previous results with natural prey, the rats should avoid ingesting the novel food after poisoning but continue to attack the novel ball bearing (though perhaps with reduced intensity; see Langley, 1981). In addition, the effects of poisoning should not generalize to the familiar bearing and food (e.g., Nicolaus et al, 1983).…”

Section: Experiments Lamentioning

confidence: 75%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of poisoning on predatory and ingestive behavior toward artificial prey in rats (Rattus norvegicus).

Timberlake

Melcer²

1988

Journal of Comparative Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ingestion of novel prey by vertebrate predators that is followed by illness typically decreases the predators' eating the prey more readily than their pursuing or killing it. We used artificial prey-food items (rolling ball bearings that predicted food pellets) to model and extend this finding in laboratory rats. During daily experimental sessions presentations of a novel bearing-food combination were intermixed with presentations of a familiar bearing-food combination. The poisoned animals received lithium chloride injections after each session. Experiment 1a showed that: (a) Poisoning markedly decreased ingestion of the novel food without decreasing the frequency of contact (nose, seize, carry, or chew) with the novel bearing predicting that food. (b) However, poisoning did significantly decrease the average duration of contact with the novel bearing. (c) Poisoning did not decrease behavior toward the familiar food and bearing. Experiment 1b showed that after moderate exposure to pairings of the novel food and bearing, poisoning decreased behavior toward both novel and familiar food and bearings. The results indicate that important aspects of predation can be simulated and examined in the laboratory by using artificial prey-food items. These results also support the conclusions that predatory behavior and ingestion reflect separable modes of behavior and that the presence of novel prey interferes with the generalization of poisoning effects to familiar prey.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Experiments Lamentioning

confidence: 75%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of poisoning on predatory and ingestive behavior toward artificial prey in rats (Rattus norvegicus).

Timberlake

Melcer²

1988

Journal of Comparative Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This independence could be interpreted here to mean that attack and feeding occur in response to different sets of stimuli. In the grasshopper mouse the attack occurs primarily in response to cues associated with movements of the prey (CYR 1972;LANGLEY 1983). In contrast feeding occurs primarily in response to gustatory and olfactory cues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulus Control of Feeding Behavior in the Grasshopper Mouse

Langley

1983

Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and Summary This study examined the stimulus control of feeding in the carnivorous grasshopper mouse, Onychomys leucogaster. Quantitative analysis of the actions involved in feeding showed that overall feeding behaviors of lab‐reared and field‐caught mice resembled one another but that the sequence of specific actions was variable. Responses by mice to cotton swabs dipped in solutions showed that after eating several crickets, the presence of prey odor more readily elicited a feeding response. The odor and moisture cues associated with exposed viscera were shown by the use of modified prey to strongly affect the orientation of feeding. Using modified prey without exposed viscera, tactile cues associated with the head and thorax proved to be important guides in the feeding response. Feeding orientation towards the head was independent of that towards the thorax. Together these data showed that the feeding sequence resembled a reaction chain and that much of the stereotypy of the mouse's feeding response resulted from the position and alignment of the cues that orient the feeding response.

show abstract

“…Within 1 hour of dispatching and eating a particular prey, a mouse received an intraperitoneal injection of 0.3 M LiCl at 2% of body weight. This typically induced toxicosis and could inhibit an attack for a day or more [Langley, 1981a;Langley and Knapp, 19821. A mouse was presented a similar prey once a day until it resumed killing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between attack and feeding in the insect predatory behavior of grasshopper mice

Langley¹

1991

Aggr. Behav.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In grasshopper mice, the consequences of feeding and state of hunger affect the predatory attack to a limited extent. The purpose of this study was: (1) to establish other ways that attack and feeding were connected besides the two effects already mentioned; and (2) to determine if caching of dead prey could account for the limited connection between attack and feeding. Experiment 1 showed that attack and feeding were connected as part of a reaction chain. Experiment 2 showed that both shared a common maturational process despite the fact that each response achieved an improved efficiency in a different way. Experiment 3 showed that caching prey was not correlated with the killing of a prey and thus could not account for the limited connection between attack and feeding. It is proposed that a highly canalized attack response specifically buffered against the effects of feeding and hunger plays an important role in the mouse's carnivorous life style.

show abstract

Failure of food-aversion conditioning to suppress predatory attack of the grasshopper mouse, Onychomys leucogaster

Cited by 17 publications

References 22 publications

Effects of poisoning on predatory and ingestive behavior toward artificial prey in rats (Rattus norvegicus).

Effects of poisoning on predatory and ingestive behavior toward artificial prey in rats (Rattus norvegicus).

Stimulus Control of Feeding Behavior in the Grasshopper Mouse

Relationship between attack and feeding in the insect predatory behavior of grasshopper mice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About