Simulation of patch use by monkeys using operant conditioning
- 96 Downloads
Food patch use by Japanese monkeys was examined using an operant conditioning procedure. Modified progressive ratio schedules, in which the probability of reinforcement decreases exponentially with the number of bar presses, were presented to 2 Japanese monkeys. Two types of schedule were used in each experimental session. One represented high quality food patches, where the probability of reinforcement was twice as high as in the other, which represented low quality food patches. The number of bar presses in each food patch was counted. Monkeys responded more frequently in high quality patches. The probability of reinforcement for the last response in each patch was the same in both types of schedule. The number of responses increased with a decrease in the occurrence of high quality patches, and with an increase in the inter-patch time interval. These results are in agreement with the predictions of Charnov’s marginal value theorem (Charnov, 1976). The pattern of patch use by monkeys observed in this study is discussed in terms of optimal foraging strategy.
KeywordsPrimatol Food Patch Japanese Monkey Progressive Ratio Schedule Quality Patch
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Brown, M.F. 1993 Sequential and simultaneous choice processes in the radial-arm maze. In: T.R. Zentall (ed.)Animal cognition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, New Jersey, pp. 153–173.Google Scholar
- Fantino, E., N. Abarca & M. Ito 1987 Choice and optimal foraging: tests of the delay-reduction hypothesis and the optimal-diet model. In: A.C. Kamil, J.R. Krebs and H.R. Pulliam (eds.)Foraging behavior. Plenum, New York, pp. 181–207.Google Scholar
- Fleagle, J.G. 1988 Primate adaptation and evolution. Academic Press, San Diego.Google Scholar
- Gautier-Hion, A., J.P. Gautier & R. Quris 1981 Forest structure and fruit availability as complementary factors influencing habitat use by a troop of monkeys (Cercopithecus cephus).Rev. Ecol. (Terre et Vie) 35: 511–536.Google Scholar
- Kacelnik, A. & I.C. Cuthill 1987 Starlings and optimal foraging theory: modeling in a fractal world. In: A.C. Kamil, J.R. Krebs and H.R. Pulliam (eds.)Foraging behavior. Plenum, New York, pp. 303–333.Google Scholar
- McFarland, D. 1985 Animal Behaviour. Pitman, London.Google Scholar
- McNamara, J.M. & A.I. Houston 1987 Foraging in patches: There is more to life than the marginal value theorem. In: M.L. Commons, A. Kacelnik and A.J. Shettleworth (eds.)Quantitative analyses of behavior, Foraging. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, New Jersey, pp. 23–39.Google Scholar
- Mellgren, R.L. & S.W. Brown 1987 Environmental constraints on optimal-foraging behavior. In: M.L. Commons, A. Kacelnik and A.J. Shettlewoth (eds.)Quantitative analyses of behavior, Foraging. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, New Jersey, pp. 133–151.Google Scholar
- Shettleworth, S. 1987 Learning and foraging in pigeons: effects of handling time and changing food availability on patch choice. In: A.C. Kamil, J.R. Krebs and H.R. Pulliam (eds.)Foraging behavior. Plenum, New York, pp. 115–132.Google Scholar