Food aversion learning in kangaroo rats: A specialist-generalist comparison

Abstract

Two species of kangaroo rat (Dipodomys), varying in their degree of dietary specialization, were compared in a series of food aversion learning experiments to test the hypothesis that rapid aversion learning is an adaptation of relatively generalist feeders. The more generalist species indeed learned better or more rapidly in certain experiments, but species differences were at least partly a function of the specific test foods. Interpretation of results is complicated by differences between the two species in their initial reactions to particular foods, in the relative efficacy of different foods in supporting learned aversions, and perhaps even in their physiological responses to illness-inducing and control procedures.In the past decade, many psychologists have embraced the notion that animal learning must be viewed comparatively, with attention being given to the ecological specializations and predispositions of subject species. But despite the popularity of such ideas (e.g., Hinde & Stevenson-Hinde, 1973;Seligman & Hager, 1973), there has been surprisingly little explicitly comparative investigation: Few have asked if related animal species that differ in their ecological adaptations respond differently to similar contingencies, and, if so, exactly how.Food aversion learning has been a favorite paradigm of critics of general accounts of learning because of the striking phenomena of long effective delays of reinforcement (Garcia, Ervin, & and cue specificity . The animal that has been most studied is the laboratory rat, a species that associates taste cues and subsequent gastric distress with ease. Rozin (1976) in particular has suggested that the rat's capacity for adaptive modification of feeding behavior is the species-specific adaptation of a dietary "generalist," and that "specialists" might be less talented in this sphere."Specialist-generalist" is clearly not a dichotomy. It may be treated as a dimension along which species may be ranked according to some index of diversity of foodstuffs consumed. A different definition of specialization focuses upon morphological and behavioral adaptations to particular foodstuffs, but we should expect animals that are specialists by the latter criterion to be specialists by the former as well. A clear case of a dietary specialization by either criterion is provided by the chisel-toothed kangaroo rat, Dipodomys microps, in the Owens Valley of California. Most Dipodomys species are predominantly granivorous, consuming seeds of a variety of plant species, but greens are a substantial dietary element in certain seasons. Owens Valley D. microps, by contrast, feeds almost exclusively upon the salty, succulent leaves of chenopod plants, mainly shadscale (Atrip/ex conjertifo/ia), a diet for which it exhibits behavioral and morphological specializations (Kenagy, 1972(Kenagy, , 1973. Cheek pouch and stomach content analyses confirm that D. microps takes a less diverse diet than other Dipodomys, particularly D. merriami, a sympatric species of more typical food habits (e.g., ...

Biological constraints on instrumental and classical conditioning: Retrospect and prospect

“…It is possible, for example, that learning of "win-stay" and "win-shift" strategies proceeds at the same rate against different baseline tendencies for spontaneous alternation. Daly, Rauschenberger, and Behrends (1982) recently completed a study that is more closely in line with our proposals. Two species of kangaroo rat (Dipodomys) that varied in their degree of dietary specialization were compared in a series of foodaversion learning studies.…”

Cognitive ecology: ecological factors, life‐styles, and cognition

“…Neophobia, in contrast, varies with stimulus complexity and the degree of deviation from what the organism has experienced before (variation) and the same may apply for exploration, innovation and learning . Several studies ranging from birds to mammals have shown that diet or habitat generalists are less neophobic than diet and habitat specialists supporting the Neophobia Threshold hypothesis stating that experiences made early in life (e.g. number of food types/habitats) are protected by neophobia later in life .…”

Learning Differences between Feral Pigeons and Zenaida Doves: The Role of Neophobia and Human Proximity

“…Neophobic animals may encounter and use a narrower range of food types than neophilic ones, and learn less rapidly about cues and rewards Ethology 107, 281Ð293 (2001) Ó 2001 Blackwell Wissenschafts-Verlag, Berlin ISSN 0179±1613 associated with novel situations they face in the ®eld and in the laboratory (Greenberg & Mettke-Homann 2000 1,2 1,2 ). As a consequence, learning dierences predicted from dierences in diet breadth (Rozin & Schull 1988) can be confounded by dierences in willingness to eat new foods (Daly et al 1982).…”