The Ecology of Foraging Behavior: Implications for Animal Learning and Memory

Kamil, Alan C.; Roitblat, Herbert L.

doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.36.020185.001041

Cited by 181 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, one of the few papers examining the sublethal effects of pesticides on spider behavior used spiders as prey rather than as predators. Everts (46)(47)(48). Extended sequences of foraging behavior are created in time rather than space, with response requirements manipulated to simulate the effortfulness of response and the probability of finding food.…”

Section: The Ethogrammentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethological and Experimental Approaches to Behavior Analysis: Implications for Ecotoxicology

Cohn¹,

MacPhail²

1996

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: The Ethogrammentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethological and Experimental Approaches to Behavior Analysis: Implications for Ecotoxicology

Cohn¹,

MacPhail²

1996

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To be efficient in utilizing the food available in a habitat, it is necessary to gather information about the habitat. The process usually invoked to account for information gathering is sampling (see Kamil & Roitblat, 1985, for a review of some of the ways the concept of sampling has been used in the foraging literature). Unlike reinforcement, which may be characterized as a mechanism for reducing the variability of performance (e.g., Staddon & Simmelhag, 1971), sampling may be characterized as a mechanism for increasing the variability of performance (Devenport, 1983).…”

Section: Within-session Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Discussions of the interactions of behavioral ecology and psychological learning principles have become common in the literature (e.g., Fantino & Abarca, 1985; Kamil, 1983;Kamil & Roitblat, 1985;Kamil & Yoerg, 1982;Lea, 1981; Pulliam, 1981;Shettleworth, 1984). These discussions usually have assumed that learning principles discovered in the psychologist's laboratory will have relevance for understanding foraging behavior in nature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrimination Learning in a Foraging Situation

Mellgren

Brown

1988

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rats were allowed to forage in a simulated natural environment made up of eight food sources (patches) each containing a fixed number of pellets. Two of the eight contained an extra supply of peanuts. The peanut patches were signaled by an olfactory/visual cue located at the bottom of the ladder leading to the patch. In successive phases the number of sessions per day, height of the patches, and availability of peanuts were manipulated. Subjects showed evidence of discrimination learning under these conditions, although the degree of discriminatory behavior varied as a function of environmental manipulations. Assessment of behavior within foraging sessions showed that subjects systematically changed their patterns of utilization of patches across time. Sampling or exploration, as well as food reinforcement, seem implicated in these results.

show abstract

“…Pyke, 1884;Kamil and Roitblat, 1985;Stephens and Krebs, 1986). For example, nectivorous insects can face unpredictable scenarios within a time scale of hours, for the amount of nectar found within flowers fluctuates continuously.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Honeybees learn the sign and magnitude of reward variations

Gil

Marco

2009

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYIn this study, we asked whether honeybees learn the sign and magnitude of variations in the level of reward. We designed an experiment in which bees first had to forage on a three-flower patch offering variable reward levels, and then search for food at the site in the absence of reward and after a long foraging pause. At the time of training, we presented the bees with a decrease in reward level or, instead, with either a small or a large increase in reward level. Testing took place as soon as they visited the patch on the day following training, when we measured the bees' food-searching behaviours. We found that the bees that had experienced increasing reward levels searched for food more persistently than the bees that had experienced decreasing reward levels, and that the bees that had experienced a large increase in reward level searched for food more persistently than the bees that had experienced a small increase in reward level. Because these differences at the time of testing cannot be accounted for by the bees' previous crop loads and food-intake rates, our results unambiguously demonstrate that honeybees adjust their investment of time/energy during foraging in relation to both the sign and the magnitude of past variations in the level of reward. It is likely that such variations lead to the formation of reward expectations enhancing a forager's reliance on a feeding site. Ultimately, this would make it more likely for honeybees to find food when forage is scarce.

show abstract

The Ecology of Foraging Behavior: Implications for Animal Learning and Memory

Cited by 181 publications

References 88 publications

Ethological and Experimental Approaches to Behavior Analysis: Implications for Ecotoxicology

Ethological and Experimental Approaches to Behavior Analysis: Implications for Ecotoxicology

Discrimination Learning in a Foraging Situation

Honeybees learn the sign and magnitude of reward variations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About