Can Monkeys Make Investments Based on Maximized Pay-off?

Animals can maximize benefits but it is not known if they adjust their investment according to expected pay-offs. We investigated whether monkeys can use different investment strategies in an exchange task. We tested eight capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) and thirteen macaques (Macaca fascicularis, Macaca tonkeana) in an experiment where they could adapt their investment to the food amounts proposed by two different experimenters. One, the doubling partner, returned a reward that was twice the amount given by the subject, whereas the other, the fixed partner, always returned a constant amount regardless of the amount given. To maximize pay-offs, subjects should invest a maximal amount with the first partner and a minimal amount with the second. When tested with the fixed partner only, one third of monkeys learned to remove a maximal amount of food for immediate consumption before investing a minimal one. With both partners, most subjects failed to maximize pay-offs by using different decision rules with each partner' quality. A single Tonkean macaque succeeded in investing a maximal amount to one experimenter and a minimal amount to the other. The fact that only one of over 21 subjects learned to maximize benefits in adapting investment according to experimenters' quality indicates that such a task is difficult for monkeys, albeit not impossible

Multidimensional Scaling Reveals the Main Evolutionary Pathways of Class A G-Protein-Coupled Receptors

Class A G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute the largest family of transmembrane receptors in the human genome. Understanding the mechanisms which drove the evolution of such a large family would help understand the specificity of each GPCR sub-family with applications to drug design. To gain evolutionary information on class A GPCRs, we explored their sequence space by metric multidimensional scaling analysis (MDS). Three-dimensional mapping of human sequences shows a non-uniform distribution of GPCRs, organized in clusters that lay along four privileged directions. To interpret these directions, we projected supplementary sequences from different species onto the human space used as a reference. With this technique, we can easily monitor the evolutionary drift of several GPCR sub-families from cnidarians to humans. Results support a model of radiative evolution of class A GPCRs from a central node formed by peptide receptors. The privileged directions obtained from the MDS analysis are interpretable in terms of three main evolutionary pathways related to specific sequence determinants. The first pathway was initiated by a deletion in transmembrane helix 2 (TM2) and led to three sub-families by divergent evolution. The second pathway corresponds to the differentiation of the amine receptors. The third pathway corresponds to parallel evolution of several sub-families in relation with a covarion process involving proline residues in TM2 and TM5. As exemplified with GPCRs, the MDS projection technique is an important tool to compare orthologous sequence sets and to help decipher the mutational events that drove the evolution of protein families

The mismeasure of ape social cognition

In his classic analysis, The Mismeasure of Man, Gould (1981) demolished the idea that intelligence was an inherent, genetic trait of different human groups by emphasizing, among other things, (a) its sensitivity to environmental input, (b) the incommensurate pre-test preparation of different human groups, and (c) the inadequacy of the testing contexts, in many cases. According to Gould, the root cause of these oversights was confirmation bias by psychometricians, an unwarranted commitment to the idea that intelligence was a fixed, immutable quality of people. By virtue of a similar, systemic interpretive bias, in the last two decades, numerous contemporary researchers in comparative psychology have claimed human superiority over apes in social intelligence, based on two-group comparisons between postindustrial, Western Europeans and captive apes, where the apes have been isolated from European styles of social interaction, and tested with radically different procedures. Moreover, direct comparisons of humans with apes suffer from pervasive lapses in argumentation: Research designs in wide contemporary use are inherently mute about the underlying psychological causes of overt behavior. Here we analyze these problems and offer a more fruitful approach to the comparative study of social intelligence, which focuses on specific individual learning histories in specific ecological circumstances

Fish and seafood consumption during pregnancy and the risk of asthma and allergic rhinitis in childhood: a pooled analysis of 18 European and US birth cohorts

Background: It has been suggested that prenatal exposure to n-3 long-chain fatty acids protects against asthma and other allergy-related diseases later in childhood. The extent to which fish intake in pregnancy protects against child asthma and rhinitis symptoms remains unclear. We aimed to assess whether fish and seafood consumption in pregnancy is associated with childhood wheeze, asthma and allergic rhinitis. Methods: We pooled individual data from 60 774 mother-child pairs participating in 18 European and US birth cohort studies. Information on wheeze, asthma and allergic rhinitis prevalence was collected using validated questionnaires. The time periods of interest were: infancy (0-2 years), preschool age (3-4 years), and school age (5-8 years). We used multivariable generalized models to assess associations of fish and seafood (other than fish) consumption during pregnancy with child respiratory outcomes in cohort-specific analyses, with subsequent random-effects meta-analyses. Results: The median fish consumption during pregnancy ranged from 0.44 times/week in The Netherlands to 4.46 times/week in Spain. Maternal fish intake during pregnancy was not associated with offspring wheeze symptoms in any age group nor with the risk of child asthma [adjusted meta-analysis relative risk (RR) per 1-time/week = 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.97-1.05)] and allergic rhinitis at school age (RR = 1.01, 0.99-1.03). These results were consistently found in further analyses by type of fish and seafood consumption and in sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: We found no evidence supporting a protective association of fish and seafood consumption during pregnancy with offspring symptoms of wheeze, asthma and allergic rhinitis from infancy to mid childhood.This work was supported by the European Community’s Seventh Framework Program [EU- FP7- HEALTH-2009-single-stage-241604]. Details of funding per cohort are available at IJE online

Bonobos and orangutans, but not chimpanzees, flexibly plan for the future in a token-exchange task

Non-human animals, including great apes, have been suggested to share some of the skills for planning that humans commonly exhibit. A crucial difference between human and non-human planning may relate to the diversity of domains and needs in which this skill is expressed. Although great apes can save tools for future use, there is little evidence yet that they can also do so in other contexts. To investigate this question further, we presented the apes with a planning token-exchange task that differed from standard tool-use tasks. Additionally, we manipulated the future outcome of the task to investigate planning flexibility. In the Exchange condition, subjects had to collect, save and transport tokens because they would need them 30 min later to exchange them for food with a human, i.e., "bring-back" response. In the Release condition, the collection and transport of tokens were not needed as no exchange took place after 30 min. Out of 13 subjects, eight solved the task at least once in the Exchange condition, with chimpanzees appearing less successful than the other species. Importantly, three individuals showed a clear differential response between conditions by producing more "bring-back" responses in the Exchange than in the Release conditions. Those bonobo and orangutan individuals hence adapted their planning behavior according to changing needs (i.e., they brought tokens back significantly more often when they would need them). Bonobos and orangutans, unlike chimpanzees, planned outside the context of tool-use, thus challenging the idea that planning in these species is purely domain-specific