Animal Behavior

CAUSES OF BEHAVIOR
1. Proximate cause:
What mechanism enables the organism to exhibit the behavior? “How” questions
concern mechanisms of immediate or proximate causation.
For example,
A biologist might explain the singing of a male white-throated sparrow in the
spring by hormonal or neural mechanisms.
It includes the operation of biological systems at a particular time and place. These
include the problems of explaining how animals perform their metabolic,
physiological, and behavioral functions at the molecular, cellular, organismal, and
even population levels.
For example, how is genetic information expressed to guide the synthesis of
proteins? What signal causes cells to divide to produce new cells?
2. Ultimate cause?
In terms of evolution, how and why did that behavior come to be?
For example:
Alternatively, a biologist might ask what function singing serves the sparrow, and
then identify events in the ancestry of birds that led to springtime singing. These
are “why” questions that focus on ultimate causation, the evolutionary origin and
purpose of a behavior.
In contrast to questions concerning the proximate causes of biological systems are
questions of the ultimate causes that have produced these systems and their
distinctive characteristics through evolutionary time.
For example, what are the evolutionary factors that caused some birds to acquire
complex patterns of seasonal migration between temperate and tropical areas?
Why do different species of animals have different numbers of chromosomes in
their
cells? Why do some animal species maintain complex social systems, whereas
other species have solitary individuals.
Niko Tinbergen’s Questions

1. What stimulus elicits the behavior, and what physiological

mechanisms mediate the response?

2. How does the animal’s experience during growth and

development influence the response?

3. How does the behavior aid survival and reproduction?

4. What is the behavior’s evolutionary history?

Tinbergen’s first two questions ask about proximate causation: “how” a behavior
occurs or is modified. The last two questions ask about ultimate causation: “why” a
behavior occurs in the context of natural selection. Thus any given behavior has
both proximate and ultimate causes
Wings in a New Light (Story of a pepper moth)
The peppered moth lands on the bark of a tree trunk and opens its wings to rest. A
hungry flycatcher bird that was close behind swoops down for a meal but loses
sight of its prey. The moth blended in with the tree trunk. Blending in let it avoid
the pesky flycatcher, so the moth lives to see another day. This may seem like a
simple act of nature, but scientists are quite curious about how and why these sorts
of interactions arise
The proximate cause of the wing color in the peppered moth is genetic.
A specific gene codes for whether they have light or dark-colored wings. In moths
that survive and reproduce, the genes for a specific color is passed to their
offspring.
Ultimate cause: Why might an animal like the peppered moth have colored
wings? Why a trait evolves is known as the ultimate cause. We now know that the
wings of the peppered moth help the moths blend in. By blending in, their chances
of survival increase. So in a specific environment, one wing color may help more
moths survive than the other wing color. That's a pretty important benefit.
Proximate and ultimate explanations also differ in the time scale over which they
act. Proximate explanations focus on things that occur during the life of an
individual. Ultimate explanations focus on things that occur in populations over
many generations
Example : a female animal chooses to mate with a particular male during a mate
choice trial. A possible proximate explanation states that one male produced a
more intense signal, leading to elevated hormone levels in the female producing
copulatory behavior.
Female animals often display preferences among male display traits, such as song.
An ultimate explanation based on sexual selection states that females who display
preferences have more vigorous or more attractive male offspring.
Experimental Versus Comparative Methods
Experimental method:
Hypotheses of proximate causes are tested using the experimental method.
Our goal is to test mechanistic explanations of a biological system. We predict the
results of an experimental treatment of the system based on our tentative
explanation of it.
If our explanation is correct, then the predicted outcome should occur.
If, after the experimental treatment, we see an unexpected outcome, we then
discover that our explanation is incorrect or incomplete
Our example in the preceding section of using clay models of moths to test avian
predation on differently colored forms illustrates experimental testing of a
hypothesis. By placing darkly colored models on both light and dark backgrounds,
we see that birds attack the ones on light backgrounds much more frequently than
they do dark models on dark backgrounds
Our interpretation that dark moths on dark backgrounds avoid predation by
camouflage requires a control. Perhaps birds choose to feed only on light,
unpolluted branches. Our control is to place light moths on both light and dark
backgrounds.
When we observe that birds preferentially attack the light models placed on dark
backgrounds, we reject the hypothesis that birds choose not to feed on dark,
polluted substrates. The simplest interpretation of the results as described here is
that birds will eat both dark and light moths that fail to match their backgrounds,
and that camouflage conceals potential prey items from avian predators
Comparative method
Tests of hypotheses of ultimate causality require the comparative method. We
compare characteristics of molecular biology, cell biology, organismal structure,
development, and ecology among related species to identify their patterns of
variation. We then use patterns of similarity and dissimilarity to test hypotheses of
relatedness and thereby to reconstruct the evolutionary tree that relates the species
being studied. Advances in DNA sequencing technology permit precise tests of
relationships among all animal species.
For example
The comparative studies of fossil birds reject the hypothesis that feathers arose for
the purpose of flight, because feathers preceded evolution of the flight apparatus in
avian ancestry. Feathers most likely served initially primarily for insulation and
only later acquired a role in aerodynamics.
It should be clear that none of these important historical questions could have been
answered by experiment