Learning and Mate Choice

Witte, Klaudia; Nöbel, Sabine

doi:10.1002/9781444342536.ch5

Cited by 29 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 139 publications

(148 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We suggest transitive inference may be mutually exclusive from social eavesdropping or winner/loser effects in the majority of species: the former being prevalent in highly social species and the latter in relatively less social species. This prediction is consistent with previous studies of highly social species, e.g., chickens (Hogue et al, 1996), territorial cichlids (Grosenick et al, 2007), river trout (White and Gowan, 2013), and a highly social cichlid M. auratus (Chase et al, 2003), and also with less social species, e.g., the fighting fish B. splendens (Oliveira et al, 1998;McGregor et al, 2001;Witte and Nobel, 2011), paradise fish (Francis, 1983), and green swordtail (Beaugrand and Goulet, 2000). A powerful test of this hypothesis may be achieved using related animal species with different levels of sociality (e.g., Bond et al, 2003;MacLean et al, 2008).…”

Section: Integration Of Cognitive Ability From Multiple Sourcessupporting

confidence: 92%

“…To predict the social status of strangers using transitive inference, it is necessary to recognize the individuals and recall their social status (Hsu et al, 2006(Hsu et al, , 2011Grosenick et al, 2007). Although studies of fish memory are even more scarce than those on recognition, there is evidence that fish can remember social information for a considerable time, for example when making mate choice decisions (e.g., Millinski et al, 1990;Dugatkin and Godin, 1993;Griffiths and Magurran, 1997a,b;Dugatkin, 2000;Tebbich et al, 2002), and integrate it with other information in future social contexts (Dugatkin, 2000;Dugatkin and Earley, 2004;Frost et al, 2007;Bshary, 2011;Witte and Nobel, 2011;Jordan and Brooks, 2012;Hotta et al, 2015). These studies suggest that advanced cognitive abilities such as transitive inference may occur across fish taxa.…”

Section: Transitive Inferencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The use of multiple sources of social information in contest behavior: testing the social cognitive abilities of a cichlid fish

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theory suggests that living in large social groups with dynamic social interactions often favors the evolution of enhanced cognitive abilities. Studies of how animals assess their own contest ability commonly focus on a single cognitive task, and little is known about the diversity or co-occurrence of cognitive abilities in social species. We examined how a highly social cichlid fish Julidochromis transcriptus uses four major cognitive abilities in contest situations; direct experience, winner/loser effects, social eavesdropping and transitive inference (TI). We conducted experiments in which fish assessed the social status of rivals after either direct physical contests or observed contests. Individuals used direct information from a previous physical encounter to re-establish dominance without additional contact, but winner/loser effects were not observed. Social eavesdropping alone was ruled out, but we found that transitive reasoning was used to infer social dominance of other individuals of unknown status. Our results suggest that in stable hierarchical social groups, estimations of contest ability, based on individual recognition pathways such as TI and direct experience, are more prevalent than social eavesdropping or winner/loser effects. We suggest that advanced cognitive abilities might be widespread among highly social fishes, but have previously gone undetected.

show abstract

Section: Integration Of Cognitive Ability From Multiple Sourcessupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Transitive Inferencementioning

confidence: 99%

The use of multiple sources of social information in contest behavior: testing the social cognitive abilities of a cichlid fish

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Operatively, evidence for mate copying is given by showing that the probability that a 'focal' female chooses a certain male either increases or decreases depending on whether she has previously observed another ('model') female to choose or to reject that male (Witte and Ueding, 2003). Originally described in lekking birds and shoaling fish (review in Dugatkin, 1996;Witte, 2006), mate copying has been further observed in other vertebrate and invertebrate taxa (insects, Mery et al, 2009;mammals, Galef et al, 2008;humans, Little et al, 2008), suggesting that the role it plays in mating decision might depend more on the ecological constraints that limit the access to this source of public information rather than on cognitive constraints that prevent females to use it. According to our model, public information influences the prior probability (P(H)), but it has no effects on either the attractiveness (A) or the utility (U(A)) of prospective mates.…”

Section: S Castellano Et Al / Behavioural Processes XXX (2012) Xxx-xxxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computational mate choice: Theory and empirical evidence

Castellano

Cadeddu

Cermelli

2012

Behavioural Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe present review is based on the thesis that mate choice results from information-processing mechanisms governed by computational rules and that, to understand how females choose their mates, we should identify which are the sources of information and how they are used to make decisions. We describe mate choice as a three-step computational process and for each step we present theories and review empirical evidence. The first step is a perceptual process. It describes the acquisition of evidence, that is, how females use multiple cues and signals to assign an attractiveness value to prospective mates (the preference function hypothesis). The second step is a decisional process. It describes the construction of the decision variable (DV), which integrates evidence (private information by direct assessment), priors (public information), and value (perceived utility) of prospective mates into a quantity that is used by a decision rule (DR) to produce a choice. We make the assumption that females are optimal Bayesian decision makers and we derive a formal model of DV that can explain the effects of preference functions, mate copying, social context, and females' state and condition on the patterns of mate choice. The third step of mating decision is a deliberative process that depends on the DRs. We identify two main categories of DRs (absolute and comparative rules), and review the normative models of mate sampling tactics associated to them. We highlight the limits of the normative approach and present a class of computational models (sequential-sampling models) that are based on the assumption that DVs accumulate noisy evidence over time until a decision threshold is reached. These models force us to rethink the dichotomy between comparative and absolute decision rules, between discrimination and recognition, and even between rational and irrational choice. Since they have a robust biological basis, we think they may represent a useful theoretical tool for behavioural ecologist interested in integrating proximate and ultimate causes of mate choice.

show abstract

“…A fish may do this either through a selfreferent matching process or by assessing the colour of those with whom it has recent experience and making decisions accordingly. While many fish learn their phenotype when young (Engeszer et al, 2004), there is evidence that recent experience can also contribute to this assessment (Mateo, 2004;Witte, 2006;Gómez-Laplaza, 2009). In sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus), self-referent phenotype matching is used in social decisions, and this, in common with much social behaviour in fish, is mediated by chemical rather than visual cues (Ward et al, 2005;Ward and Currie, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs of colour change in fish: food intake and behavioural decisions

Rodgers

Gladman

Corless

et al. 2013

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYMany animals, particularly reptiles, amphibians, fish and cephalopods, have the ability to change their body colour, for functions including thermoregulation, signalling and predator avoidance. Many fish plastically darken their body colouration in response to dark visual backgrounds, and this functions to reduce predation risk. Here, we tested the hypotheses that colour change in fish (1) carries with it an energetic cost and (2) affects subsequent shoal and habitat choice decisions. We demonstrate that guppies (Poecilia reticulata) change colour in response to dark and light visual backgrounds, and that doing so carries an energetic cost in terms of food consumption. By increasing food intake, however, guppies are able to maintain growth rates and meet the energetic costs of changing colour. Following colour change, fish preferentially choose habitats and shoals that match their own body colouration, and maximise crypsis, thus avoiding the need for further colour change but also potentially paying an opportunity cost associated with restriction to particular habitats and social associates. Thus, colour change to match the background is complemented by behavioural strategies, which should act to maximise fitness in variable environments.

show abstract

Learning and Mate Choice

Cited by 29 publications

References 139 publications

The use of multiple sources of social information in contest behavior: testing the social cognitive abilities of a cichlid fish

The use of multiple sources of social information in contest behavior: testing the social cognitive abilities of a cichlid fish

Computational mate choice: Theory and empirical evidence

Costs of colour change in fish: food intake and behavioural decisions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About