Poison-based avoidance learning in nonhuman primates: Use of visual cues

Johnson, Candace K.; Beaton, Robert J.; Hall, Katherine

doi:10.1016/0031-9384(75)90003-7

Cited by 59 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, it is not surprising that the ability to quickly learn to associate the sensory properties of a potential food with the toxic and metabolic consequences of eating that food, and to use such associations to guide subsequent feeding behavior has been demonstrated in a wide variety of species [Forbes, 1998]. With regard to nonhuman primates, several studies have shown one-trial learning with visual cues in conditioned food-avoidance paradigms [e.g., Hikami et al, 1990;Johnson et al, 1975]. This is also true for squirrel monkeys [Laska & Metzker, 1998] and spider monkeys [Fairbanks, 1975].…”

Section: Use Of Senses In Primate Food Selection / 289mentioning

confidence: 98%

Which senses play a role in nonhuman primate food selection? A comparison between squirrel monkeys and spider monkeys

Laska¹,

Freist²,

Krause³

2006

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to optimize foraging efficiency and avoid toxicosis, animals must be able to detect, discriminate, and learn about the predictive signals of potential food. Primates are typically regarded as animals that rely mainly on their highly developed visual systems, and little is known about the role that the other senses may play in food selection. It was therefore the aim of the present study to assess which senses are involved in the evaluation of food by two species of New World primates: the squirrel monkey and the spider monkey. To this end, six animals per species were repeatedly presented with both familiar and novel food items, and their behavior was videotaped and analyzed. To obtain a further indication of the relative importance of visual and chemosensory cues, the animals were also presented with familiar food items that were experimentally modified in color, odor, or both color and odor. The results demonstrate that squirrel monkeys and spider monkeys use olfactory, gustatory, and tactile cues in addition to visual information to evaluate novel food, whereas they mainly inspect familiar food items visually prior to consumption. Our findings also show that in both species the use of nonvisual cues decreased rapidly with repeated presentations of novel food, suggesting a fast multimodal learning process. Further, the two species clearly differ in their relative use of nonvisual cues when evaluating novel or modified food, with spider monkeys relying more on olfactory cues than squirrel monkeys, and squirrel monkeys relying more on tactile cues compared to spider monkeys.

show abstract

Section: Use Of Senses In Primate Food Selection / 289mentioning

confidence: 98%

Which senses play a role in nonhuman primate food selection? A comparison between squirrel monkeys and spider monkeys

Laska¹,

Freist²,

Krause³

2006

American J Primatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, if such explanations are to be truly revealing, they must be based on analysis, not solely on conjecture (although conjecture may of course be a source of fruitful hypotheses), and such analysis has been lacking in the biological boundaries approach. Thus, while it may be reasonable to argue that primates can learn to associate visual cues with nausea because they normally select food on the basis of such cues (Johnson et al 1975), in the absence of an empirical demonstration of how primates do in fact select food, this remains a hypothesis, not an explanation. Similarly, the fact that hamsters can be reinforced with food for digging, scrabbling, and rearing may be due to the occurrence of such actions during feeding (Shettleworth 1975), but this needs to be demonstrated by observations of naturally occurring behavior.…”

Section: Theoretical Implications Of the Biological Boundariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many of the results suggest that the nature of the effective cues is determined by the way in which food is typically selected by members of a particular species. Thus quail (Wilcoxon, Dragoin & Kral 1971) and vervet monkeys (Johnson, Beaton, & Hall 1975), which may rely on visual cues in food selection, are able to learn to avoid noxious food on the basis of visual as well as gustatory cues. For the rat, a nocturnal scavenger, presumably visual cues are rarely available in the context of food selection, and so the ability to associate such cues with subsequent illness has never been selected for in the evolution of this species ( Rozin & Kalat 1971).…”

Section: Contemporary Approaches To the Study Of Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contrasting approaches to a theory of learning

Johnston

1981

Behav Brain Sci

400

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The general process view of learning, which guided research into learning for the first half of this century, has come under attack in recent years from several quarters. One form of criticism has come from proponents of the so-called biological boundaries approach to learning. These theorists have presented a variety of data showing that supposedly general laws of learning may in fact be limited in their applicability to different species and learning tasks, and they argue that the limitations are drawn by the nature of each species, adaptation to the particular requirements of its natural environment. The biological boundaries approach has served an important critical function in the move away from general process learning theory, but it is limited in its ability to provide an alternative to the general process approach. In particular, the biological boundaries approach lacks generality, it is in some respects subservient to the general process tradition, and its ecological content is in too many cases limited to ex post facto adaptive explanations of learning skills. A contrasting, ecological approach to learning, which can provide a true alternative to general process theory, is presented. The ecological approach begins by providing an ecological task description for naturally occurring instances of learning; this step answers the question: What does this animal learn to do? The next step is an analysis of the means by which learning occurs in the course of development, answering the question : How does the animal learn to do this? On the basis of such analyses, local principles of adaptation are formulated to account for the learning abilities of individual species. More global principles are sought by generalization among these local principles and may form the basis for a general ecological theory of learning.

show abstract

“…Innate responses to aversive or attractive stimuli and delayed responses l o physiological cues associated with food chemical content can influence the development of feeding patterns [Rozin, 1976[Rozin, , 1977[Rozin, , 1979Harborne, 1977;Hall & Bryan, 19811. At least some primates [Harlow, 1964;Johnson et al, 1975;Gustavson, 19771 and some nonprimate large generalist herbivores [Zahourik & Haupt, 1977, 19811 can learn aversions to foods associated experimentally with delayed illness, but this may not occur in the wild [Rozin, 1977;Zahourik & Haupt, 1977, 19811. Fossey [1979 describes the ontogeny of mountain gorilla food procession techniques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Observations on the ontogeny of feeding behavior in mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei)

Watts

1985

American J Primatol

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report describes observations on the ontogeny of food choice in mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei), made during a 17-month field study of mountain gorilla feeding ecology in the Parc National des Volcans, Rwanda. Data are presented on the feeding behavior of two infants observed from birth to the age of 8 months and on older infants and juveniles. This information is compared with data on the composition and diversity of the diets of young adults and adults in the same social group. Initial feeding by infants is usually synchronized with the mother's behavior: infants ingest the same food, or a different part of the same plant species, currently being eaten by the mother or just eaten by her. This suggests that observational learning is largely responsible for the transmission of food preferences. Most feeding by young infants, whether or not synchronized with the mother's, is on those foods eaten most frequently by adults. Infants also independently sample potential foods, some of which are apparently not consumed by adults. The frequency of sampling declines with age, although even adults occasionally ingest foods not observed to be eaten by other adults. By the age of 3 years, young mountain gorillas have developed the basic dietary patterns of adults, in terms of the number of foods eaten, the proportions in which specific foods are consumed, and diet diversity and equitability. There is a strong possibility that chemical cues influence food choice, but their role remains unclear.

show abstract

Poison-based avoidance learning in nonhuman primates: Use of visual cues

Cited by 59 publications

References 9 publications

Which senses play a role in nonhuman primate food selection? A comparison between squirrel monkeys and spider monkeys

Which senses play a role in nonhuman primate food selection? A comparison between squirrel monkeys and spider monkeys

Contrasting approaches to a theory of learning

Observations on the ontogeny of feeding behavior in mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About