Persistence explains differences in innovation in Darwin’s finches with a different foraging ecology
Data files
Oct 16, 2023 version files 17.96 KB
-
Ibáñez_de_Aldecoa_BeEc.xlsx
12.61 KB
-
README.md
5.35 KB
Abstract
The capacity to create new behaviors is influenced by environmental factors such as foraging ecology, which can lead to phylogenetic variation in innovativeness. Alternatively, these differences may arise due to the selection of the underlying mechanisms, collaterally affecting innovativeness. To understand the evolutionary pathways that might enhance innovativeness, we examined the role of diet breadth and degree of extractive foraging, as well as a range of intervening cognitive and behavioral mechanisms (neophilia, neophobia, flexibility, motivation and persistence). Darwin’s finches are very suitable for this purpose: the clade is composed of closely related species that vary in their feeding habits and capacity to develop food innovations. Using a multi-access box, we conducted an interspecies comparison on innovative problem-solving between two diet specialists, extractive foragers (woodpecker and cactus finch), and two diet generalist, non-extractive foragers (small and medium ground finch). We predicted that, if extractive foraging was associated with high innovativeness, variation would be best explained by species differences in persistence and motivation, whereas if diet generalism was the main driver then variation would be due to differences in flexibility and responses to novelty. We found a faster capacity to innovate and a higher persistence for extractive foragers, suggesting that persistence might be adaptive to extractive foraging and only secondarily to innovation. Our findings also show that diet generalism and some variables linking it to innovation were unrelated to innovativeness, and call for the development of joint experimental approaches that capture the diversity of factors giving rise to novel behaviors.
This README file was generated on 2023-10-16 by Paula Ibáñez de Aldecoa.
GENERAL INFORMATION
- Title of Dataset: Persistence explains differences in innovation in Darwin’s finches with a different foraging ecology.
These are the data used to fit models 1, 2, and 3, and to generate figures 2, 3, and 4, as specified in the article’s experimental procedures.
-
Author Information:
A. Principal Investigator Contact Information
Name: Paula Ibáñez de Aldecoa
Institution: University of Vienna
Address: Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Biology, Biologiezentrum University of Vienna. Djerasiplatz 1, 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Email: paula.i.aldecoa@univie.ac.at
<br>
B. Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information
Name: Sabine Tebbich
Institution: University of Vienna
Address: Department of Behavioural and Cognitive Biology, Biologiezentrum University of Vienna. Djerasiplatz 1, 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Email: sabine.tebbich@univie.ac.atC. Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information
Name: Andrea S. Griffin
Institution: University of Newcastle
Address: School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, New South Wales 2308, Australia.
Email: andrea.griffin@newcastle.edu.au - Date of data collection (single date, range, approximate date): September-December 2019
- Geographic location of data collection: Charles Darwin Research Station, Santa Cruz (Galápagos, Ecuador)
- Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data: Austrian Science Fund (W1262-B29)
#########################################################################
SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION
- Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: None
- Links to publications that cite or use the data:
Ibáñez de Aldecoa, P., Tebbich, S., Griffin, A. (2023). Persistence explains differences in innovation in Darwin’s finches with a different foraging ecology. Behavioral Ecology.
- Links to other publicly accessible locations of the data: https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:1633207
- Links/relationships to ancillary data sets: None
- Was data derived from another source? No
A. If yes, list source(s): NA - Recommended citation for this dataset:
Ibáñez de Aldecoa, P., Tebbich, S., Griffin, A. (2023). Data from: Persistence explains differences in innovation in Darwin’s finches with a different foraging ecology. Dryad Digital Repository: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.79cnp5j2j.
#########################################################################
DATA & FILE OVERVIEW
- File Name: Darwin’s finch foraging ecol.csv
- Relationship between files, if important: None
- Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package: None
- Are there multiple versions of the dataset? No
A. If yes, name of file(s) that was updated: NA
i. Why was the file updated? NA
ii. When was the file updated? NA
#########################################################################
DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION
- Number of variables: 8
- Number of cases/rows: 39
> > > NOTE: The dataset contains one value per individual for each of the following variables: innovativeness, flexibility, persistence, motivation, neophobia, neophilia.
- Variable List:
- id: individual identification alphanumeric code.
> > > Type of variable: categorical.
* species: bird species.
> > > Type of variable: categorical.
> > > Potential range: 4 (Cactus finch, Medium ground finch, Small ground finch, Woodpecker finch).
* innovativeness: number of trials needed until first mechanism is solved.
> > > Type of variable: numerical (discrete).
> > > Potential range: 1 to 140.
* flexibility: number of mechanisms discovered.
> > > Type of variable: numerical (discrete).
> > > Potential range: 0 to 4.
* persistence: number of contacts with all mechanisms with respect to participantion trials.
> > > Type of variable: numerical (continuous).
> > > Potential range: 0 to infinity.
* motivation: number of rehabituation trials with respect to participantion trials.
> > > Type of variable: numerical (continuous).
> > > Potential range: 0 to 28.
* neophobia: latency (in seconds) to feed next to a novel object in the presence of food.
> > > Type of variable: numerical (discrete).
> > > Potential range: -1800 to 1801.
> > > NOTE: A score calculated as ceiling value (1801) minus control feeding latency was assigned if bird did not feed.
* neophilia: latency (in seconds) to touch a novel object.
> > > Type of variable: numerical (discrete).
> > > Potential range: 1 to 1801.
> > > NOTE: A ceiling value (1801 s = 1 s longer than the test duration) was assigned if bird did not touch the object.
- Missing data codes: NA (data not applicable): two birds (identified as B10S6 and B12S6) did not get a score for the variable ‘innovativeness’ as they did not discover any mechanism of the Multi-Access Box.
- Specialized formats or other abbreviations used: None
#########################################################################