Who are the innovators? A field experiment with 2 passerine species
Who are the innovators? A field experiment with 2 passerine species
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/beheco/arr120
复制
发表时间：
2011-11-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Quinn, John L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Morand-Ferron, Julie;Cole, Ella F.;Quinn, John L.
物种间创新的生态和进化驱动因素得到了相对较好的研究，但物种内相似变异的意义却知之甚少。使用自动觅食设备，我们在野生鸟类种群中进行了第一次大规模的新奇问题解决能力研究，以测试创新能力的差异是否可以由固有的个体差异和与“需要驱动创新”假说相关的因素来解释。我们检测了20145只大山雀(大山雀)和蓝山雀(蓝山雀)的20145次访问，发现在解决倾向和在现场连续解决方案之间花费在设备上的时间上存在一致的个体差异。尽管在圈养中成功完成类似任务的个体在野外解决问题的速度是在圈养中不成功的个体的3倍，但圈养成功并不能预测在野外的成功。因此，创新倾向因人而异，但它也取决于背景。青少年比成年人更有可能在野外解决这个问题，这支持了必要性驱动创新的假说。我们在野外没有发现在解决问题的设备上进行社交学习的证据。我们报告的新奇问题解决能力的一致个体差异表明，创新能力可能在我们的人群中具有适应性意义。我们的结果还表明，创新能力的选择可能主要发生在青少年中。
Ecological and evolutionary drivers of innovativeness among species are relatively well studied, but the significance of similar variation within species is much less well understood. Using automated foraging devices, we conducted the first large-scale study of novel problem-solving performance in a wild bird population to test whether variation in innovativeness can be explained by inherent individual differences and by factors related to the "necessity drives innovation'' hypothesis. We detected 20145 visits by 236 great tits (Parus major) and blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus) and found consistent individual differences in the propensity to solve and in the time spent at devices between successive solutions in the field. Although individuals that were successful in a similar version of the task in captivity solved 3 times faster in the wild than those that were unsuccessful in captivity, success in captivity did not predict success in the wild. Thus, innovative propensity varies among individuals but it is also context dependent. Juveniles were more likely to solve the problem in the wild than adults, supporting the necessity drives innovation hypothesis. We found no evidence for social learning at problem-solving devices in the wild. The consistent individual differences in novel problem-solving performance we report suggest that innovativeness may be of adaptive significance within our population. Our results also suggest that selection for innovativeness may occur primarily among juveniles.