23 research outputs found

    Habituation of the Light-Startle Response of Orange Head Cockroaches (Eublaberus posticus): Effects of Acclimation, Stimulus Duration, Presence of Food, and Intertrial Interval

    No full text
    The purpose of this paper is to establish the orange head cockroach (Eublaberus posticus) as a useful insect subject for research in comparative psychology by investigating habituation of the light-startle response (LSR). While one goal of comparative psychology is to compare the behavior of a diversity of species, many taxa, including cockroaches, are grossly underrepresented. Our work serves to improve this deficit by investigating habituation learning in the orange head cockroach in four experiments. In our first experiment, we found that LSR, and habituation of LSR, occurs to both lights being turned on and lights being turned off. In our second experiment, we found that the duration of a light did not affect response, and that spontaneous recovery of LSR occurs after 24 h intervals. In our third experiment, we found that the presence of food inhibited LSR. In our final experiment, we found that the rate of LSR habituation decreased as intertrial interval increased, in a manner predicted by established principles of habituation. Our work lays a strong foundation for future research on the behavior of orange head cockroaches as well as learning in cockroaches in general. We hope that our findings help establish cockroaches as practical insect subjects for research in comparative psychology and related fields such as behavior analysis and behavioral ecology

    Conspecific and interspecific stimuli reduce initial performance in an aversive learning task in honey bees (Apis mellifera).

    No full text
    The purpose of this experiment was to investigate whether honey bees (Apis mellifera) are able to use social discriminative stimuli in a spatial aversive conditioning paradigm. We tested bees' ability to avoid shock in a shuttle box apparatus across multiple groups when either shock, or the absence of shock, was associated with a live hive mate, a dead hive mate, a live Polistes exclamans wasp or a dead wasp. Additionally, we used several control groups common to bee shuttle box research where shock was only associated with spatial cues, or where shock was associated with a blue or yellow color. While bees were able to learn the aversive task in a simple spatial discrimination, the presence of any other stimuli (color, another bee, or a wasp) reduced initial performance. While the color biases we discovered are in line with other experiments, the finding that the presence of another animal reduces performance is novel. Generally, it appears that the use of bees or wasps as stimuli initially causes an increase in overall activity that interferes with early performance in the spatial task. During the course of the experiment, the bees habituate to the insect stimuli (bee or wasp), and begin learning the aversive task. Additionally, we found that experimental subject bees did not discriminate between bees or wasps used as stimulus animals, nor did they discriminate between live or dead stimulus animals. This may occur, in part, due to the specialized nature of the worker honey bee. Results are discussed with implications for continual research on honey bees as models of aversive learning, as well as research on insect social learning in general

    Çiftlik hayvanlarında şartlandırma yöntemleri

    Get PDF
    This review briefly surveys the range of conditioning methods used in the study of learning for economically important farm animals. We begin by discussing the importance of conditioning methods, provide an overview of non-associative and associative learning and follow by showing how these methods are applied to chickens, cows, horses, goats and sheep. Information on general resources is also provided.Bu makalede ekonomik öneme sahip çiftlik hayvanlarının eğitilmesinde kullanılan şartlandırma metodları ele alınmıştır. Öncelikle şartlandırma yöntemlerinin önemi değerlendirilmiş, birarada-toplu yaşam ile ilişkili olan ve olmayan öğrenme konusunda bilgiler verilmiş ve ardından bu metodların tavuklarda, ineklerde, atlarda, keçilerde ve koyunlarda kullanımlarına ilişkin genel bir bakış açısı sunulmuştur. Makalede aynı zamanda genel araştırmalar hakkında da bilgilere yer verilmiştir

    An Assessment of Fixed Interval Timing in Free-Flying Honey Bees (<i>Apis mellifera ligustica</i>): An Analysis of Individual Performance

    No full text
    <div><p>Interval timing is a key element of foraging theory, models of predator avoidance, and competitive interactions. Although interval timing is well documented in vertebrate species, it is virtually unstudied in invertebrates. In the present experiment, we used free-flying honey bees (<i>Apis mellifera ligustica</i>) as a model for timing behaviors. Subjects were trained to enter a hole in an automated artificial flower to receive a nectar reinforcer (i.e. reward). Responses were continuously reinforced prior to exposure to either a fixed interval (FI) 15-sec, FI 30-sec, FI 60-sec, or FI 120-sec reinforcement schedule. We measured response rate and post-reinforcement pause within each fixed interval trial between reinforcers. Honey bees responded at higher frequencies earlier in the fixed interval suggesting subject responding did not come under traditional forms of temporal control. Response rates were lower during FI conditions compared to performance on continuous reinforcement schedules, and responding was more resistant to extinction when previously reinforced on FI schedules. However, no “scalloped” or “break-and-run” patterns of group or individual responses reinforced on FI schedules were observed; no traditional evidence of temporal control was found. Finally, longer FI schedules eventually caused all subjects to cease returning to the operant chamber indicating subjects did not tolerate the longer FI schedules.</p></div

    Aversive conditioning in honey bees (Apis mellifera anatolica): A comparison of drones and workers

    No full text
    Honey bees provide a model system to elucidate the relationship between sociality and complex behaviors within the same species, as females (workers) are highly social and males (drones) are more solitary. We report on aversive learning studies in drone and worker honey bees (Apis mellifera anatolica) in escape, punishment and discriminative punishment situations. In all three experiments, a newly developed electric shock avoidance assay was used. The comparisons of expected and observed responses were performed with conventional statistical methods and a systematic randomization modeling approach called object oriented modeling. The escape experiment consisted of two measurements recorded in a master-yoked paradigm: frequency of response and latency to respond following administration of shock. Master individuals could terminate an unavoidable shock triggered by a decrementing 30 s timer by crossing the shuttlebox centerline following shock activation. Across all groups, there was large individual response variation. When assessing group response frequency and latency, master subjects performed better than yoked subjects for both workers and drones. In the punishment experiment, individuals were shocked upon entering the shock portion of a bilaterally wired shuttlebox. The shock portion was spatially static and unsignalled. Only workers effectively avoided the shock. The discriminative punishment experiment repeated the punishment experiment but included a counterbalanced blue and yellow background signal and the side of shock was manipulated. Drones correctly responded less than workers when shock was paired with blue. However, when shock was paired with yellow there was no observable difference between drones and workers.National Science Foundation -- DBI 0552717National Science Foundation -- 126332

    Cumulative hole-entering response records for the final session for Bee 3 in group 0-15-X (PCC value: 0.28) and Bee 9 in group 0-30-X (PCC value: 0.27).

    No full text
    <p>Response duration during reinforcement delivery is not displayed to illustrate a cumulative record of responses occurring between stimulus onset and a reinforced response. Responding resumes immediately following reinforcement consumption, and breaks in responding occurred intermittently during some trials. Short diagonal lines below the cumulative curve indicate reinforcement delivery.</p

    Hole-entering response rate ordinal comparisons within individuals for the final FI session under the prediction that responding would increase across the interval.

    No full text
    <p>Intervals were divided into two equal duration bins, and combinations of these bins were ordinally compared. PCC values and accompanying <i>c</i>-values are displayed for individuals. Only one subject's PCC value was higher than a binomial comparison, but did not reliably differ from the randomized PCC values.</p><p><sup>*</sup>Subject did not complete the 20<sup>th</sup> FI session.</p
    corecore