The effect of eye-like schema on shuttling activity of wild house mice (Mus musculus domesticus): Context-dependent threatening aspects of the eyespot patterns

Abstract

The effects offootshock and various light-spot models on the shuttling activity of mice were examined in a passive avoidance situation. It was found that mild footshocks elicited initial exploration followed by an increased tendency to escape from the compartment in which the shocks were administered. An encounter with models, consisting of various numbers of small yellow lights, without footshock did not cause significant differences in shuttling activity. But if the models were paired with footshock, a tendency to explore during the first trial, high readiness to escape, and avoidance learning were found. These were characterized by a temporary increase in number of gate crossings, a decrease in the time spent in the shocked compartment, and a considerable increase in latency to enter the shocked compartment. The most effective model had two horizontally arranged yellow lights, which may share some characteristics with eye-like patterns.Defensive behavior systems are commonly thought to be the product of the influence of extremely strong selection pressure upon not only the form of defense, but also the relationship between defensive behavior and the stimuli or situation that elicits this action (R. J. Blanchard, D. C. Blanchard, & Hori, 1989). In the case of a given species, the functional significance of a pattern of defensive behavior is revealed by an analysis of the interaction between the dynamics of behavior and the ecological system to which the species has adapted. Among the most typical situations activating defensive behavior are predator-prey interactions, when the crucial problem for most species is the effective recognition and avoidance of predators. Both ethology and comparative psychology have, for a long time, demonstrated an intense interest in various defensive behavior patterns, especially this pattern of "recognition and avoidance."A number of recent ethological studies suggest a very precise and apparently adaptive relationship between specific stimuli or situations and the nature of the defensive response of a given species. Many observations have supported the hypothesis that animals can recognize their natural predators and respond to them by species-specific passive or active avoidance behavior, in most cases independently of prior experience (Arnold & Bennett, 1984;

Why do dogs (Canis familiaris) select the empty container in an observational learning task?

“…While direct eye contact typically functions as a threat cue in most animal species (e.g. Topál and Csányi 1994), dogs are unique among non-human animals to show sensitivity and preference for this ostensive cue of human communication Topál et al 2009a). For example, in two-way choice tasks in which dogs have a possibility to choose one of the possible hiding locations, subjects are biased to select the location mistakenly indicated by the human's ostensive-communicative referential cues especially if the human demonstrator is present during choice (Topál et al 2009b) and even if they had been unambiguously informed about the location of the reward (Szetei et al 2003;Erdöhegyi et al 2007).…”

The effect of early handling is dependent upon the state of the rabbit(Oryctolagus cuniculus) pups around nursing

“…In sum, the fearful behavior of nonhandled, timid rabbits can be interpreted as predator avoidance. The inherited ability of prey to recognize and avoid predatorlike objects were well described earlier in many species (e.g., Coss, 1979;Csányi, 1985;Miklósi, Pongrácz, & Csányi, 1997;Topál & Csányi, 1994). Rabbits are probably genetically programmed to recognize some key stimuli, for example, two facing eyes or carnivorous odors, as potential signals for dangerous creatures (Pongrácz & Altbäcker, 1999).…”

The Ontogeny of Antipredator Behaviour in Paradise Fish Larvae (Macropodus opercularis): The Recognition of Eyespots

“…A common cue of both conspecific and heterospecific fish-predators is the presence of two horizontal eyespots. The significance of these features in antipredator behaviour has been confirmed not only in fish (COSS 1978 a; ALTBACKER & CSANYI 1990) but also in mammals (COSS 1978 b;TOPAL & CSANYI 1994), birds (SCAIFE 1976) and reptiles (BURGHARDT & GREENE 1988).…”