Arquivo da tag: Inteligência animal

Social Animals Have More Social Smarts (Science Daily)

June 26, 2013 — Lemurs from species that hang out in big tribes are more likely to steal food behind your back instead of in front of your face.

In a series of stills taken from videotaped experiments, Duke undergraduates Joel Bray (left) and Aaron Sandel test a ringtailed lemur’s (Lemur catta) willingness to take food from a watched or unwatched plate. (Credit: Evan MacLean, Duke)

This behavior suggests that primates who live in larger social groups tend to have more “social intelligence,” a new study shows. The results appear June 27 in PLOS ONE.

A Duke University experiment tested whether living in larger social networks directly relates to higher social abilities in animals. Working with six different species of lemurs living at the Duke Lemur Center, a team of undergraduate researchers tested 60 individuals to see if they would be more likely to steal a piece of food if a human wasn’t watching them.

In one test, a pair of human testers sat with two plates of food. One person faced the plate and the lemur entering the room, the other had his or her back turned. In a second, testers sat in profile, facing toward or away from the plate. In a third, they wore a black band either over their eyes or over their mouths and both faced the plates and lemurs.

As the lemurs jumped onto the table where the plates were and decided which bit of food to grab, the ones from large social groups, like the ringtailed lemur (Lemur catta), were evidently more sensitive to social cues that a person might be watching, said Evan MacLean, a research scientist in the Department Of Evolutionary Anthropology who led the research team. Lemurs from small-group species, like the mongoose lemur (Eulemur mongoz), were less sensitive to the humans’ orientation.

Few of the lemurs apparently understood the significance of a blindfold.

The work is the first to test the relationship between group size and social intelligence across multiple species. The findings support the “social intelligence hypothesis,” which suggests that living in large social networks drove the evolution of complex social cognition in primates, including humans, MacLean said.

Behavioral experiments are critical to test the idea because assumptions about intelligence based solely on brain size may not hold up, he said. Indeed, this study found that some lemur species had evolved more social smarts without increasing the size of their brains.

Journal Reference:

  1. Evan L. MacLean, Aaron A. Sandel, Joel Bray, Ricki E. Oldenkamp, Rachna B. Reddy, Brian A. Hare. Group Size Predicts Social but Not Nonsocial Cognition in Lemurs.PLoS ONE, 2013; 8 (6): e66359 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0066359

Social Networks Could Help Prevent Disease Outbreaks in Endangered Chimpanzees (Science Daily)

June 5, 2013 — Many think of social networks in terms of Facebook friends and Twitter followers, but for recent University of Georgia doctoral graduate Julie Rushmore, social networks are tools in the fight against infectious diseases.

Two adult males in the Kanyawara chimpanzee community rest in Kibale National Park, Uganda. (Credit: Julie Rushmore/UGA)

Rushmore, who completed her doctorate in the Odum School of Ecology in May, analyzed the social networks of wild chimpanzees to determine which individuals were most likely to contract and spread pathogens. Her findings, published in the Journal of Animal Ecology on June 5, could help wildlife managers target their efforts to prevent outbreaks and potentially help public health officials prevent disease in human populations as well.

Effective disease intervention for this species is important for a number of reasons. Wild chimpanzees are highly endangered, and diseases — including some that also infect humans — are among the most serious threats to their survival. And due to habitat loss, chimpanzees increasingly overlap with human populations, so disease outbreaks could spread to people and livestock, and vice versa.

Disease prevention in wildlife is logistically challenging, and resources are scarce, Rushmore explained. Even when vaccines are available, it is impractical to vaccinate every individual in a wildlife population. She and her colleagues decided to use social network analysis to pinpoint individuals most important in disease transmission.

“Modeling studies in humans have shown that targeting central individuals for vaccination is significantly more effective than randomly vaccinating,” Rushmore said. “There have been a few social network studies in wildlife systems — bees, lions, meerkats, lizards and giraffes — but this is the first paper to map out social networks in the context of disease transmission and conservation for wild primates.”

Rushmore observed a community of wild chimpanzees in Kibale National Park in Uganda, recording the interactions of individuals and family groups over a nine-month period to determine which individuals — and which types of individuals — were most central.

“Chimpanzees are ideal for this study because to collect this observational behavioral data, you don’t need to collar them or use any invasive methods. You can essentially just observe chimpanzees in their natural environment and identify them individually based on their facial features,” she said.

Rushmore collected information about the traits of individual chimpanzees including age, sex, rank and family size. Rank for adult males was based on dominance, while for adult females and juveniles it was based on location: Those that lived and foraged in the interior of the community’s territory were considered of higher rank than those that roamed its edges.

From December 2009 to August 2010, Rushmore recorded the interactions of chimpanzees in the community at 15-minute intervals between 6 a.m. and 7:30 p.m., four to six days per week. She mapped her observations onto a diagram showing how often each individual associated with the others.

This analysis revealed that the most central figures in the network turned out to be high-ranking mothers and juveniles with large families. “They form nursing parties — essentially like day care — where several families will hang out together,” she said. “In that way they become quite central because they have contact with a large portion of the community.”

Second in centrality were the high-ranking males.

“There are many studies in humans, and at least one in chimpanzees, showing that from an immunological perspective, juveniles and children are really important for maintaining diseases in populations through play and things like that,” she said.

“In addition, high-ranking male chimpanzees are often immunosuppressed because they have high levels of testosterone and have been shown to have higher rates of parasitism. So it seems that in addition to being central to the network, the juveniles and the high-ranking males in particular could also have lower immunity than other individuals, which might help facilitate them acquiring and transmitting pathogens.”

Rushmore’s findings have implications for disease prevention beyond chimpanzees.

“This work can easily be applied to other systems,” she said. “You could use similar methods to identify which traits are predictive of centrality. The theme that would carry over from our findings is that these central individuals are likely important to target for vaccination or treatment.”

Rushmore and her colleagues are continuing their research into social networks and disease. They currently are using infectious disease models to simulate outbreaks on these networks and to develop targeted pathogen interventions.

“Ultimately, we want to develop vaccination strategies that could both prevent large outbreaks and lower the number of animals requiring vaccination,” Rushmore said.

The study’s co-authors were Damien Caillaud of the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International and the University of Texas at Austin, Leopold Matamba of the UGA department of mathematics, Rebecca M. Stumpf of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Stephen P. Borgatti of the University of Kentucky and Sonia Altizer of the UGA Odum School of Ecology.

Journal Reference:

  1. Julie Rushmore, Damien Caillaud, Leopold Matamba, Rebecca M. Stumpf, Stephen P. Borgatti, Sonia Altizer.Social network analysis of wild chimpanzees provides insights for predicting infectious disease riskJournal of Animal Ecology, 2013; DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.12088

Why Animals Compare the Present With the Past (Science Daily)

May 30, 2013 — Humans, like other animals, compare things. We care not only how well off we are, but whether we are better or worse off than others around us, or than we were last year. New research by scientists at the University of Bristol shows that such comparisons can give individuals an evolutionary advantage.

The ‘contrast effect’ has been reported in a number of living things, including bees. (Credit: © Daniel Prudek / Fotolia)

According to standard theory, the best response to current circumstances should be unaffected by what has happened in the past. But the Bristol study, published in the journalScience, shows that in a changing, unpredictable world it is important to be sensitive to past conditions.

The research team, led by Professor John McNamara in Bristol’s School of Mathematics, built a mathematical model to understand how animals should behave when they are uncertain about the pattern of environmental change. They found that when animals are used to rich conditions but then conditions suddenly worsen, they should work less hard than animals exposed to poor conditions all along.

The predictions from the model closely match findings from classic laboratory experiments in the 1940s, in which rats were trained to run along a passage to gain food rewards. The rats ran more slowly for small amounts of food if they were used to getting large amounts of food, compared to control rats that were always rewarded with the smaller amount.

This so-called ‘contrast effect’ has also been reported in bees, starlings and a variety of mammals including newborn children, but until now it lacked a convincing explanation.

Dr Tim Fawcett, a research fellow in Bristol’s School of Biological Sciences and a co-author on the study, said: “The effects in our model are driven by uncertainty. In changing environments, conditions experienced in the past can be a valuable indicator of how things will be in the future.”

This, in turn, affects how animals should respond to their current situation. “An animal that is used to rich conditions thinks that the world is generally a good place,” Dr Fawcett explained. “So when conditions suddenly turn bad, it interprets this as a temporary ‘blip’ and hunkers down, expecting that rich conditions will return soon. In contrast, an animal used to poor conditions expects those conditions to persist, and so cannot afford to rest.”

The model also predicts the reverse effect, in which animals work harder for food when conditions suddenly improve, compared to animals experiencing rich conditions all along. This too has been found in laboratory experiments on a range of animals.

The Bristol study highlights unpredictable environmental fluctuations as an important evolutionary force. “Rapid changes favour individuals that are responsive and able to adjust their behaviour in the light of past experience,” said Dr Fawcett. “The natural world is a dynamic and unpredictable place, but evolutionary models often neglect this. Our work suggests that models of more complex environments are important for understanding behaviour.”

Journal Reference:

  1. J. M. McNamara, T. W. Fawcett, A. I. Houston. An Adaptive Response to Uncertainty Generates Positive and Negative Contrast EffectsScience, 2013; 340 (6136): 1084 DOI: 10.1126/science.1230599

A mulher que encolheu o cérebro humano (O Globo)

Suzana Herculano é a primeira brasileira a falar na prestigiada conferência TED

Ela debaterá o cérebro de 86 bilhões de neurônios (e não 100 bilhões, como se acreditava) e como o homem se diferenciou dos primatas 

Publicado:24/05/13 – 7h00; Atualizado:24/05/13 – 11h41

Suzana Herculano-Houzel, professora do Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas da UFRJFoto: Guito Moreto

Suzana Herculano-Houzel, professora do Instituto de Ciências Biomédicas da UFRJ Guito Moreto

Neurocientista da UFRJ, Suzana Herculano-Houzel é a primeira brasileira a participar da TED (Tecnologia, Entretenimento e Design, em português) — prestigiada série de conferências que reúne grandes nomes das mais diversas áreas do conhecimento para debater novas ideias. Suzana falará no dia 12 de junho, sob o tema “Ouça a natureza”, e destacará suas descobertas únicas sobre o cérebro humano.

Sobre o que vai falar na TED?

Vou falar sobre o cérebro humano e mostrar como ele não é um cérebro especial, uma exceção à regra. Nossas pesquisas nos revelaram que se trata apenas de um cérebro de primata grande. O notável é que passamos a ter um cérebro enorme, do tamanho que nenhum outro primata tem, nem os maiores, porque inventamos o cozimento dos alimentos e, com isso, passamos a ter um número enorme de neurônios.

O cozimento foi fundamental para nos tornarmos humanos?

Sim, burlamos a limitação energética imposta pela dieta crua. E a implicação bacana e irônica é que, com isso, conseguimos liberar tempo no cérebro para nos dedicarmos a outras coisas (que não buscar alimentos), como criar a agricultura, as civilizações, a geladeira e a eletricidade. Até o ponto em que conseguir comida cozida e calorias em excesso ficou tão fácil que, agora, temos o problema inverso: estamos comendo demais. Por isso, voltamos à saladinha.

Se alimentarmos orangotangos e gorilas com comida cozida eles serão tão inteligentes quanto nós?

Sim, porque não seriam limitados pelo número reduzido de calorias que conseguem com a comida crua. Claro que nós fizemos uma inovação cultural ao inventar a cozinha. Tem uma diferença entre dar comida cozida para o animal e ele ter o desenvolvimento cultural do cozimento. Mas, ainda assim, se em todas as refeições eles tiverem acesso à comida cozida, daqui a 200 mil ou 300 mil anos eles terão o cérebro maior. Com a alimentação que têm hoje, não é possível terem um cérebro maior dado o corpo grande que têm. É uma coisa ou outra.

Somos especiais?

A gente não é especial coisa alguma. Somos apenas um primata que burlou as regras energéticas e conseguiu botar mais neurônios no cérebro de um jeito que nenhum outro animal conseguiu. Por isso estudamos os outros animais e não o contrário.

Persistem ainda mitos sobre o cérebro? Como o dos 100 bilhões de neurônios, que seus estudos demonstraram que são, na verdade, 86 bilhões?

Sim, eles continuam existindo, mesmo na neurociência. O nosso trabalho já é muito citado como referência. As coisas estão mudando. E o mais legal é que é por conta da ciência tupiniquim, o que eu acho maravilhoso. Mas vemos que é um processo, que ainda tem muita gente que insiste no número antigo.

O novo manual de diagnóstico de doenças mentais dos EUA (que serve de referência para todo o mundo, inclusive para a OMS) foi lançado na semana passada em meio à controvérsia. Especialistas acham que são tantos transtornos que praticamente não resta mais nenhum espaço para a normalidade. Qual a sua opinião?

Acho que essa discussão é muito necessária, justamente para reconhecermos o que são as variações ao redor do normal e quais são os extremos problemáticos e doentios de fato. Então, a discussão é importante, ótima a qualquer momento. Mas acho também que há muita informação errada e sensacionalista circulando, sobretudo sobre o déficit de atenção. As estatísticas variam muito de país para país, às vezes porque varia o número de médicos que reconhece a criança como portadora do distúrbio. E acho que ainda há um problema enorme, um medo enorme do estereótipo da doença mental. Até hoje ainda existe uma resistência louca em ir a um psiquiatra. E acho que, pelo contrário, ganhamos muito reconhecendo que existem transtornos e que eles podem ser tratados.

Ainda há muito estigma?

O maior problema hoje em dia é que é feio ter um distúrbio no cérebro. Perceba que nem estou falando em transtorno mental. Precisar de remédio para o cérebro é terrível. E temos tanto a ganhar reconhecendo os problemas, fazendo os diagnósticos. O cérebro é tão complexo, tem tanta coisa para dar errado, que o espantoso é que não dê problema em todo mundo sempre. Então, acho normal que boa parte da população tenha algum problema, não me espanta nem um pouco. E, uma vez que se reconhece o problema, que se faz o diagnóstico, há a opção de poder tratar. Se dispomos de um tratamento, por que não usar?

O presidente dos EUA, Barack Obama, recentemente anunciou uma inédita iniciativa de reunir pesquisadores dos mais diversos centros para estudar exclusivamente o cérebro. O que podemos esperar de tamanho esforço científico?

Não só o cérebro, mas o cérebro em atividade. Obama quer ir além do que já tinham feito — estudar a função de diferentes áreas — e entender como se conectam, como falam umas com as outras, ter ideia desse funcionamento integrado, dessa interação. Essa é uma das grandes lacunas do conhecimento: entender como as várias partes do cérebro funcionam ao mesmo tempo. Não sabemos como o cérebro funciona como um todo; é uma das fronteiras finais do conhecimento.

Não sabemos como o cérebro funciona?

Como um todo, não. Sabemos o que as partes fazem, mas não sabemos como se dá a conversa entre elas. Não sabemos a origem da consciência, da sensação do “eu estou aqui agora”. Que áreas são fundamentais para isso? É esse tipo de conhecimento que se está buscando, do cérebro funcionando ao vivo e em cores, em tempo real.

O objetivo não é estudar doenças, então?

Não, o grande objetivo é estudar consciência, memória; entender como o cérebro reúne emoção e lógica, coisas que são fruto da ação coordenada de várias partes. Claro que desse conhecimento todo podem surgir implicações para o Alzheimer e outras doenças. Mas, na verdade, falar em doenças é uma roupagem usada pela divulgação do programa para o público assimilar melhor. Existe esse preconceito de que a ciência só vale quando resolve uma doença.

Leia mais sobre esse assunto em http://oglobo.globo.com/ciencia/a-mulher-que-encolheu-cerebro-humano-8482825#ixzz2UFWUvdYn © 1996 – 2013. Todos direitos reservados a Infoglobo Comunicação e Participações S.A. Este material não pode ser publicado, transmitido por broadcast, reescrito ou redistribuído sem autorização.

Monkey Math: Baboons Show Brain’s Ability to Understand Numbers (Science Daily)

May 3, 2013 — Opposing thumbs, expressive faces, complex social systems: it’s hard to miss the similarities between apes and humans. Now a new study with a troop of zoo baboons and lots of peanuts shows that a less obvious trait — the ability to understand numbers — also is shared by humans and their primate cousins.

Sabina, an olive baboon at the Seneca Park Zoo in Rochester, N.Y., participates in a University of Rochester study led by cognitive scientist Jessica Cantlon. (Credit: J. Adam Fenster, University of Rochester)

“The human capacity for complex symbolic math is clearly unique to our species,” says co-author Jessica Cantlon, assistant professor of brain and cognitive sciences at the University of Rochester. “But where did this numeric prowess come from? In this study we’ve shown that non-human primates also possess basic quantitative abilities. In fact, non-human primates can be as accurate at discriminating between different quantities as a human child.”

“This tells us that non-human primates have in common with humans a fundamental ability to make approximate quantity judgments,” says Cantlon. “Humans build on this talent by learning number words and developing a linguistic system of numbers, but in the absence of language and counting, complex math abilities do still exist.”

Cantlon, her research assistant Allison Barnard, postdoctoral fellow Kelly Hughes, and other colleagues at the University of Rochester and the Seneca Park Zoo in Rochester, N.Y., reported their findings online May 2 in the open-access journal Frontiers in Comparative Psychology. The study tracked eight olive baboons, ages 4 to 14, in 54 separate trials of guess-which-cup-has-the-most-treats. Researchers placed one to eight peanuts into each of two cups, varying the numbers in each container. The baboons received all the peanuts in the cup they chose, whether it was the cup with the most goodies or not. The baboons guessed the larger quantity roughly 75 percent of the time on easy pairs when the relative difference between the quantities was large, for example two versus seven. But when the ratios were more difficult to discriminate, say six versus seven, their accuracy fell to 55 percent.

That pattern, argue the authors, helps to resolve a standing question about how animals understand quantity. Scientists have speculated that animals may use two different systems for evaluating numbers: one based on keeping track of discrete objects — a skill known to be limited to about three items at a time — and a second approach based on comparing the approximate differences between counts.

The baboons’ choices, conclude the authors, clearly relied on this latter “more than” or “less than” cognitive approach, known as the analog system. The baboons were able to consistently discriminate pairs with numbers larger than three as long as the relative difference between the peanuts in each cup was large. Research has shown that children who have not yet learned to count also depend on such comparisons to discriminate between number groups, as do human adults when they are required to quickly estimate quantity. Studies with other animals, including birds, lemurs, chimpanzees, and even fish, have also revealed a similar ability to estimate relative quantity, but scientists have been wary of the findings because much of this research is limited to animals trained extensively in experimental procedures. The concern is that the results could reflect more about the experimenters than about the innate ability of the animals.

“We want to make sure we are not creating a ‘Clever Hans effect,'” cautions Cantlon, referring to the horse whose alleged aptitude for math was shown to rest instead on the ability to read the unintentional body language of his human trainer. To rule out such influence, the study relied on zoo baboons with no prior exposure to experimental procedures. Additionally, a control condition tested for human bias by using two experimenters — each blind to the contents of the other cup — and found that the choice patterns remained unchanged.

A final experiment tested two baboons over 130 more trials. The monkeys showed little improvement in their choice rate, indicating that learning did not play a significant role in understanding quantity.

“What’s surprising is that without any prior training, these animals have the ability to solve numerical problems,” says Cantlon. The results indicate that baboons not only use comparisons to understand numbers, but that these abilities occur naturally and in the wild, the authors conclude.

Finding a functioning baboon troop for cognitive research was serendipitous, explains study co-author Jenna Bovee, the elephant handler at the Seneca Park Zoo who is also the primary keeper for the baboons. The African monkeys are hierarchical, with an alpha male at the top of the social ladder and lots of jockeying for status among the other members of the group. Many zoos have to separate baboons that don’t get along, leaving only a handful of zoos with functioning troops, Bovee explained.

Involvement in this study and ongoing research has been enriching for the 12-member troop, she said, noting that several baboons participate in research tasks about three days a week. “They enjoy it,” she says. “We never have to force them to participate. If they don’t want to do it that day, no big deal.

“It stimulates our animals in a new way that we hadn’t thought of before,” Bovee adds. “It kind of breaks up their routine during the day, gets them thinking. It gives them time by themselves to get the attention focused on them for once. And it reduces fighting among the troop. So it’s good for everybody.”

The zoo has actually adapted some of the research techniques, like a matching game with a touch-screen computer that dispenses treats, and taken it to the orangutans. “They’re using an iPad,” she says.

She also enjoys documenting the intelligence of her charges. “A lot of people don’t realize how smart these animals are. Baboons can show you that five is more than two. That’s as accurate as a typical three year old, so you have to give them that credit.”

Cantlon extends those insights to young children: “In the same way that we underestimate the cognitive abilities of non-human animals, we sometimes underestimate the cognitive abilities of preverbal children. There are quantitative abilities that exist in children prior to formal schooling or even being able to use language.”

Other University of Rochester co-authors on the study include Regina Gerhardt, an undergraduate student in brain and cognitive sciences, and Louis DiVincenti, a veterinarian and senior instructor in comparative medicine. This research was supported by the James S. McDonnell Foundation.

Journal Reference:
  1. Allison M. Barnard, Kelly D. Hughes, Regina R. Gerhardt, Louis DiVincenti, Jenna M. Bovee and Jessica F. Cantlon.Inherently Analog Quantity Representations in Olive Baboons (Papio anubis)Frontiers in Comparative Psychology, 2013 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00253

Fish Win Fights On Strength of Personality (Science Daily)

Apr. 26, 2013 — When predicting the outcome of a fight, the big guy doesn’t always win suggests new research on fish. Scientists at the University of Exeter and Texas A&M University found that when fish fight over food, it is personality, rather than size, that determines whether they will be victorious. The findings suggest that when resources are in short supply personality traits such as aggression could be more important than strength when it comes to survival.

Scientists at the University of Exeter and Texas A&M University found that when fish fight over food, it is personality, rather than size, that determines whether they will be victorious. (Credit: University of Exeter)

The study, published in the journalBehavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, found that small fish were able to do well in contests for food against larger fish provided they were aggressive. Regardless of their initial size, it was the fish that tended to have consistently aggressive behaviour — or personalities — that repeatedly won food and as a result put on weight.

Dr Alastair Wilson from Biosciences at the University of Exeter said: “We wondered if we were witnessing a form of Napoleon, or small man, syndrome. Certainly our study indicates that small fish with an aggressive personality are capable of defeating their larger, more passive counterparts when it comes to fights over food. The research suggests that personality can have far reaching implications for life and survival.”

The sheepshead swordtail fish (Xiphophorus birchmanni) fish were placed in pairs in a fish tank, food was added and their behaviour was captured on film. The feeding contest trials were carried out with both male and female fish. The researchers found that while males regularly attacked their opponent to win the food, females were much less aggressive and rarely attacked.

In animals, personality is considered to be behaviour that is repeatedly observed under certain conditions. Major aspects of personality such as shyness or aggressiveness have previously been characterised and are thought to have important ecological significance. There is also evidence to suggest that certain aspects of personality can be inherited. Further work on whether winning food through aggression could ultimately improve reproductive success will shed light on the heritability of personality traits.

Journal Reference:

  1. Alastair J Wilson, Andrew Grimmer, Gil G. Rosenthal.Causes and consequences of contest outcome: aggressiveness, dominance and growth in the sheepshead swordtail, Xiphophorus birchmanni.Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2013; DOI:10.1007/s00265-013-1540-7

‘When in Rome’: Monkeys Found to Conform to Social Norms (Science Daily)

Apr. 25, 2013 — The human tendency to adopt the behaviour of others when on their home territory has been found in non-human primates.

Vervet monkeys. (Credit: © JLindsay / Fotolia)

Researchers at the University of St Andrews observed ‘striking’ fickleness in male monkeys, when it comes to copying the behaviour of others in new groups. The findings could help explain the evolution of our human desire to seek out ‘local knowledge’ when visiting a new place or culture.

The new discovery was made by Dr Erica van de Waal and Professor Andrew Whiten of the University of St Andrews, along with Christèle Borgeaud of the University of Neuchâtel.

Professor Whiten commented, “As the saying goes, ‘When in Rome, do as the Romans do’. Our findings suggest that a willingness to conform to what all those around you are doing when you visit a different culture is a disposition shared with other primates.”

The research was carried out by observing wild vervet monkeys in South Africa. The researchers originally set out to test how strongly wild vervet monkey infants are influenced by their mothers’ habits.

But more interestingly, they found that adult males migrating to new groups conformed quickly to the social norms of their new neighbours, whether it made sense to them or not.

Professor Whiten commented, “The males’ fickleness is certainly a striking discovery. At first sight their willingness to conform to local norms may seem a rather mindless response — but after all, it’s how we humans often behave when we visit different cultures.

“It may make sense in nature, where the knowledge of the locals is often the best guide to what are the optimal behaviours in their environment, so copying them may actually make a lot of sense.”

In the initial study, the researchers provided each of two groups of wild monkeys with a box of maize corn dyed pink and another dyed blue. The blue corn was made to taste repulsive and the monkeys soon learned to eat only pink corn. Two other groups were trained in this way to eat only blue corn.

A new generation of infants were later offered both colours of food — neither tasting badly — and the adult monkeys present appeared to remember which colour they had previously preferred.

Almost every infant copied the rest of the group, eating only the one preferred colour of corn.

The crucial discovery came when males began to migrate between groups during the mating season.

The researchers found that of the ten males who moved to groups eating a different coloured corn to the one they were used to, all but one switched to the new local norm immediately.

The one monkey who did not switch, was the top ranking in his new group who appeared unconcerned about adopting local behavior.

Dr van de Waal conducted the field experiments at the Inkawu Vervet Project in the Mawana private game reserve in South Africa. She became familiar with all 109 monkeys, making it possible for her to document the behaviour of the males who migrated to new groups.

She said, “The willingness of the immigrant males to adopt the local preference of their new groups surprised us all. The copying behaviour of both the new, naïve infants and the migrating males reveals the potency and importance of social learning in these wild primates, extending even to the conformity we know so well in humans.”

Commenting on the research, leading primatologist Professor Frans de Waal, of the Yerkes Primate Center of Emory University, said that the study “is one of the few successful field experiments on cultural transmission to date, and a remarkably elegant one at that.”

The study has been hailed by leading primate experts as rare experimental proof of ‘cultural transmission’ in wild primates to date. The research is published April 25 by the journalScience.

Journal Reference:

  1. E. van de Waal, C. Borgeaud, A. Whiten. Potent Social Learning and Conformity Shape a Wild Primate’s Foraging DecisionsScience, 2013; 340 (6131): 483 DOI:10.1126/science.1232769

Self-Medication in Animals Much More Widespread Than Believed (Science Daily)

Apr. 11, 2013 — It’s been known for decades that animals such as chimpanzees seek out medicinal herbs to treat their diseases. But in recent years, the list of animal pharmacists has grown much longer, and it now appears that the practice of animal self-medication is a lot more widespread than previously thought, according to a University of Michigan ecologist and his colleagues.

A parasite-infected monarch butterfly lays her eggs on medicinal tropical milkweed that will help to protect her offspring from disease. (Credit: Image credit Jaap de Roode)

Animals use medications to treat various ailments through both learned and innate behaviors. The fact that moths, ants and fruit flies are now known to self-medicate has profound implications for the ecology and evolution of animal hosts and their parasites, according to Mark Hunter, a professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and at the School of Natural Resources and Environment.

In addition, because plants remain the most promising source of future pharmaceuticals, studies of animal medication may lead the way in discovering new drugs to relieve human suffering, Hunter and two colleagues wrote in a review article titled “Self-Medication in Animals,” to be published online today in the journal Science.

“When we watch animals foraging for food in nature, we now have to ask, are they visiting the grocery store or are they visiting the pharmacy?” Hunter said. “We can learn a lot about how to treat parasites and disease by watching other animals.”

Much of the work in this field has focused on cases in which animals, such as baboons and woolly bear caterpillars, medicate themselves. One recent study has suggested that house sparrows and finches add high-nicotine cigarette butts to their nests to reduce mite infestations.

But less attention has been given to the many cases in which animals medicate their offspring or other kin, according to Hunter and his colleagues. Wood ants incorporate an antimicrobial resin from conifer trees into their nests, preventing microbial growth in the colony. Parasite-infected monarch butterflies protect their offspring against high levels of parasite growth by laying their eggs on anti-parasitic milkweed.

Hunter and his colleagues suggest that researchers in the field should “de-emphasize the ‘self’ in self-medication” and base their studies on a more inclusive framework.

“Perhaps the biggest surprise for us was that animals like fruit flies and butterflies can choose food for their offspring that minimizes the impacts of disease in the next generation,” Hunter said. “There are strong parallels with the emerging field of epigenetics in humans, where we now understand that dietary choices made by parents influence the long-term health of their children.”

The authors argue that animal medication has several major consequences on the ecology and evolution of host-parasite interactions. For one, when animal medication reduces the health of parasites, there should be observable effects on parasite transmission or virulence.

For example, when gypsy moth caterpillars consume foliage high in certain toxic compounds, transmission of viruses between the caterpillars is reduced, facilitating moth outbreaks.

In addition, animal medication should affect the evolution of animal immune systems, according to Hunter and his colleagues. Honeybees are known to incorporate antimicrobial resins into their nests. Analysis of the honeybee genome suggests that they lack many of the immune-system genes of other insects, raising the possibility that honeybees’ use of medicine has been partly responsible — or has compensated — for a loss of other immune mechanisms.

The authors also note that the study of animal medication will have direct relevance for human food production. Disease problems in agricultural organisms can worsen when humans interfere with the ability of animals to medicate, they point out.

For example, increases in parasitism and disease in honeybees can be linked to selection by beekeepers for reduced resin deposition by their bees. A reintroduction of such behavior in managed bee colonies would likely have great benefits for disease management, the authors say.

The first author of the Science paper is Jacobus de Roode of Emory University. The other author is Thierry Lefevre of the Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement in France.

Journal Reference:

  1. J. C. de Roode, T. Lefevre, M. D. Hunter. Self-Medication in AnimalsScience, 2013; 340 (6129): 150 DOI:10.1126/science.1235824

Chimpanzees Use Botanical Skills to Discover Fruit (Science Daily)

Apr. 10, 2013 — Fruit-eating animals are known to use their spatial memory to relocate fruit, yet, it is unclear how they manage to find fruit in the first place. Researchers of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, have now investigated which strategies chimpanzees in the Taï National Park in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa, use in order to find fruit in the rain forest. The result: Chimpanzees know that trees of certain species produce fruit simultaneously and use this botanical knowledge during their daily search for fruit.

Chimpanzees gazing up tree crowns in their search for fruit. (Credit: Ammie Kalan)

To investigate if chimpanzees know that if a tree is carrying fruit, then other trees of the same species are likely to carry fruit as well, the researchers conducted observations of their inspections, i.e. the visual checking of fruit availability in tree crowns. They focused their analyses on recordings in which they saw chimpanzees inspect empty trees, when they made “mistakes.”

By analysing these “mistakes,” the researchers were able to exclude that sensory cues of fruit had triggered the inspection and were the first to learn that chimpanzees had expectations of finding fruit days before feeding on it. They, in addition, significantly increased their expectations of finding fruit after tasting the first fruit in season. “They did not simply develop a ‘taste’ for specific fruit on which they had fed frequently,” says Karline Janmaat. “Instead, inspection probability was predicted by a particular botanical feature — the level of synchrony in fruit production of the species of encountered trees.”

The researchers conclude that chimpanzees know that trees of certain species produce fruit simultaneously and use this information during their daily search for fruit. They base their expectations of finding fruit on a combination of botanical knowledge founded on the success rates of fruit discovery and an ability to categorize fruits into distinct species. “Our results provide new insights into the variety of food-finding strategies employed by our close relatives, the chimpanzees, and may well elucidate the evolutionary origins of categorization abilities and abstract thinking in humans,” says Christophe Boesch, director of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology’s Department of Primatology.

Journal Reference:

  1. Karline R. L. Janmaat, Simone D. Ban & Christophe Boesch Ta. Chimpanzees use Botanical Skills to Discover Fruit: What we can Learn from their Mistakes.Animal Cognition, 10 April 2013

Young Children Have Grammar and Chimpanzees Don’t (Science Daily)

Apr. 10, 2013 — A new study from the University of Pennsylvania has shown that children as young as 2 understand basic grammar rules when they first learn to speak and are not simply imitating adults.

Nim Chimpsky. (Credit: Image courtesy of Herbert Terrace, who began Project Nim in the early 1970s)

The study also applied the same statistical analysis on data from one of the most famous animal language-acquisition experiments — Project Nim — and showed that Nim Chimpsky, a chimpanzee who was taught sign language over the course of many years, never grasped rules like those in a 2-year-old’s grammar.

The study was conducted by Charles Yang, a professor of linguistics in the School of Arts and Sciences and of computer science in the School of Engineering and Applied Science. It was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Linguists have long debated whether young children actually understand the grammar they are using or are simply memorizing and imitating adults. One of the difficulties in resolving this debate is the inherent limitations of the data; 2-year-old children have very small vocabularies and thus don’t provide many different examples of grammar usage.

“While a child may not say very much, that doesn’t mean that they don’t know anything about language,” Yang said, “Despite the superficial lack of diversity of speech patterns, if you study it carefully and formulate what having a grammar would entail within those limitations, even young children seem very much on target.”

Yang’s approach was to look at one area of grammar that young children do regularly display: article usage, or whether to put “a” or “the” before a noun. He found a sufficient number of examples of article usage in the nine data sets of child speech he analyzed, but there was another challenge in determining if these children understood the grammar rules they were using.

“When children use articles, they’re pretty much error free from day one,” Yang said. “But being error free could mean that they’ve learned the grammar of article usage in English, or they have memorized and are imitating adults who wouldn’t make mistakes either.”

To get around this problem, Yang took advantage of the fact that most nouns can be paired with either the definite or indefinite article to produce a grammatically correct phrase, but the resulting phrases have different meanings and usages. This makes the combinations vary in frequency.

For example, “the bathroom” is a more common phrase than “a bathroom,” while “a bath” is more common than “the bath.” This difference has nothing to do with grammar but rather the frequency with which phrases containing those combinations are used. There are simply more opportunities to use phrases like “I need to go to the bathroom” or “the dog needs a bath” than there are phrases like “there’s a bathroom on the second floor” or “the bath was too cold.”

This means that the likelihood of using a particular article with a given noun is not 50/50; it is weighted toward either “the” or “a.” Such lopsided combination tendencies can be characterized by general statistical laws of language, which Yang used to develop a mathematical model for predicting the expected diversity of noun phrases in a sample of speech.

This model was able to differentiate between the expected diversity if children were using grammar, as compared to if they were simply imitating adults. Due to the differences of these frequencies, an adult might only say “the bathroom” — never saying “a bathroom” — to a child, but that child would still be able to say “a bathroom” if he or she understood the underlying grammar.

“When you compare what children should say if they follow grammar against what children do say, you find it to almost indistinguishable,” Yang said. “If you simulate the expected diversity when a child is only repeating what adults say, it produces a diversity much lower than what children actually say.”

As a comparison, Yang applied the same predictive models to the set of Nim Chimpsky’s signed phrases, the only data set of spontaneous animal language usage publicly available. He found further evidence for what many scientists, including Nim’s own trainers, have contended about Nim: that the sequences of signs Nim put together did not follow from rules like those in human language.

Nim’s signs show significantly lower diversity than what is expected under a systematic grammar and were similar to the level expected with memorization.

This suggests that true language learning is — so far — a uniquely human trait, and that it is present very early in development.

“The idea that children are only imitating adults’ language is very intuitive, so it’s seen a revival over the last few years,” Yang said. “But this is strong statistical evidence in favor of the idea that children actually know a lot about abstract grammar from an early age.”

Journal Reference:

  1. C. Yang. Ontogeny and phylogeny of language.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2013; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1216803110

Monkey Study Reveals Why Middle Managers Suffer the Most Stress (Science Daily)

Apr. 2, 2013 — A study by the universities of Manchester and Liverpool observing monkeys has found that those in the middle hierarchy suffer the most social stress. Their work suggests that the source of this stress is social conflict and may help explain studies in humans that have found that middle managers suffer the most stress at work.

Female Barbary macaques at Trentham Monkey Forest. (Credit: Image courtesy of Manchester University)

Katie Edwards from Liverpool’s Institute of Integrative Biology spent nearly 600 hours watching female Barbary macaques at Trentham Monkey Forest in Staffordshire. Her research involved monitoring a single female over one day, recording all incidents of social behaviour. These included agonistic behaviour like threats, chases and slaps, submissive behaviour like displacing, screaming, grimacing and hind-quarter presentation and affiliative behaviour such as teeth chatter, embracing and grooming.

The following day faecal samples from the same female were collected and analysed for levels of stress hormones at Chester Zoo’s wildlife endocrinology laboratory.

Katie explains what she found: “Not unsurprisingly we recorded the highest level of stress hormones on the days following agonistic behaviour. However, we didn’t find a link between lower stress hormone levels and affiliative behaviour such as grooming.”

She continues: “Unlike previous studies that follow a group over a period of time and look at average behaviours and hormone levels, this study allowed us to link the observed behaviour of specific monkeys with their individual hormone samples from the period when they were displaying that behaviour.”

Another key aspect of the research was noting where the observed monkey ranked in the social hierarchy of the group. The researchers found that monkeys from the middle order had the highest recorded levels of stress hormones.

Dr Susanne Shultz, a Royal Society University Research Fellow in the Faculty of Life Sciences at The University of Manchester oversaw the study: “What we found was that monkeys in the middle of the hierarchy are involved with conflict from those below them as well as from above, whereas those in the bottom of the hierarchy distance themselves from conflict. The middle ranking macaques are more likely to challenge, and be challenged by, those higher on the social ladder.”

Katie says the results could also be applied to human behaviour: “It’s possible to apply these findings to other social species too, including human hierarchies. People working in middle management might have higher levels of stress hormones compared to their boss at the top or the workers they manage. These ambitious mid-ranking people may want to access the higher-ranking lifestyle which could mean facing more challenges, whilst also having to maintain their authority over lower-ranking workers.”

The research findings have been published in the journalGeneral and Comparative Endocrinology.

Talking about the research, Susan Wiper the Director of Trentham Monkey Forest, said: “Katie has conducted a thorough study with very interesting results based on the natural groupings and environment that the Barbary macaques live in here. We are always pleased when more data is found on this fascinating endangered species of non-human primate.”

Katie is currently based at Chester Zoo where she is studying hormone levels in relation to behaviour in a bid to encourage Black Rhinos to reproduce more frequently.

Journal Reference:

  1. Katie L. Edwards, Susan L. Walker, Rebecca F. Bodenham, Harald Ritchie, Susanne Shultz. Associations between social behaviour and adrenal activity in female Barbary macaques: Consequences of study designGeneral and Comparative Endocrinology, 2013; 186: 72 DOI: 10.1016/j.ygcen.2013.02.023

Chimps: Ability to ‘Think About Thinking’ Not Limited to Humans (Science Daily)

Apr. 3, 2013 — Humans’ closest animal relatives, chimpanzees, have the ability to “think about thinking” — what is called “metacognition,” according to new research by scientists at Georgia State University and the University at Buffalo.

Humans’ closest animal relatives, chimpanzees, have the ability to “think about thinking.” (Credit: © Ambigreen / Fotolia)

Michael J. Beran and Bonnie M. Perdue of the Georgia State Language Research Center (LRC) and J. David Smith of the University at Buffalo conducted the research, published in the journalPsychological Science of the Association for Psychological Science.

“The demonstration of metacognition in nonhuman primates has important implications regarding the emergence of self-reflective mind during humans’ cognitive evolution,” the research team noted.

Metacognition is the ability to recognize one’s own cognitive states. For example, a game show contestant must make the decision to “phone a friend” or risk it all, dependent on how confident he or she is in knowing the answer.

“There has been an intense debate in the scientific literature in recent years over whether metacognition is unique to humans,” Beran said.

Chimpanzees at Georgia State’s LRC have been trained to use a language-like system of symbols to name things, giving researchers a unique way to query animals about their states of knowing or not knowing.

In the experiment, researchers tested the chimpanzees on a task that required them to use symbols to name what food was hidden in a location. If a piece of banana was hidden, the chimpanzees would report that fact and gain the food by touching the symbol for banana on their symbol keyboards.

But then, the researchers provided chimpanzees either with complete or incomplete information about the identity of the food rewards.

In some cases, the chimpanzees had already seen what item was available in the hidden location and could immediately name it by touching the correct symbol without going to look at the item in the hidden location to see what it was.

In other cases, the chimpanzees could not know what food item was in the hidden location, because either they had not seen any food yet on that trial, or because even if they had seen a food item, it may not have been the one moved to the hidden location.

In those cases, they should have first gone to look in the hidden location before trying to name any food.

In the end, chimpanzees named items immediately and directly when they knew what was there, but they sought out more information before naming when they did not already know.

The research team said, “This pattern of behavior reflects a controlled information-seeking capacity that serves to support intelligent responding, and it strongly suggests that our closest living relative has metacognitive abilities closely related to those of humans.”

The research was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

Journal Reference:

  1. M. J. Beran, J. D. Smith, B. M. Perdue. Language-Trained Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) Name What They Have Seen but Look First at What They Have Not SeenPsychological Science, 2013; DOI:10.1177/0956797612458936

Dogs May Understand Human Point of View (Science Daily)

Feb. 11, 2013 — Domestic dogs are much more likely to steal food when they think nobody can see them, suggesting for the first time that dogs are capable of understanding a human’s point of view.

Dr Juliane Kaminski and her dog, Ambula. (Credit: Image courtesy of University of Portsmouth)

Many dog owners think their pets are clever or that they understand humans but, until now, this has not been tested by science.

Dr Juliane Kaminski, of the University of Portsmouth’s Department of Psychology, has shown that when a human forbids a dog from taking food, dogs are four times more likely to disobey in a dark room than a lit room, suggesting they take into account what the human can or cannot see.

Dr Kaminski said: “That’s incredible because it implies dogs understand the human can’t see them, meaning they might understand the human perspective.”

This is the first study to examine if dogs differentiate between different levels of light when they are developing strategies on whether to steal food. It is published in the journal Animal Cognition. The research was funded by the Max Planck Society, Dr Kaminski’s former employer.

Dr Kaminski said: “Humans constantly attribute certain qualities and emotions to other living things. We know that our own dog is clever or sensitive, but that’s us thinking, not them.

“These results suggest humans might be right, where dogs are concerned, but we still can’t be completely sure if the results mean dogs have a truly flexible understanding of the mind and others’ minds. It has always been assumed only humans had this ability.”

The research is an incremental step in our understanding of dogs’ ability to think and to understand which could, in turn, be of use to those working with dogs and those who keep them as pets.

Dr Kaminski ran a series of experiments in varied light conditions. In each test, a dog was forbidden by a human from taking the food. When the room was dark, the dogs took more food and took it more quickly than when the room was lit.

The tests were complex and involved many variables to rule out that dogs were basing their decisions on simple associative rules, for example, that dark means food.

There is no evidence on how well dogs can see in the dark, but the results of this research show dogs can differentiate between light and dark.

Dr Kaminski said: “The results of these tests suggest that dogs are deciding it’s safer to steal the food when the room is dark because they understand something of the human’s perspective.”

Dogs’ understanding may be limited to the here and now, rather than on any higher understanding, Dr Kaminski said, and more research is needed to identify what mechanisms are controlling dogs’ behaviour.

In total, 42 female and 42 male domestic dogs aged one year or older took part in the tests. They were chosen only if they were comfortable without their owners in the room, even in complete darkness, and if they were interested in food. “Some dogs are more interested in by food than others,” Dr Kaminski said.

Previous studies have shown chimpanzees have a sophisticated understanding and seem to know when someone else can or can’t see them and can also remember what others have seen in the past. It is not known how sophisticated dogs’ understanding is in comparison. Many earlier research papers have found that, for dogs, a human’s eyes are an important signal when deciding how to behave, and that they respond more willingly to attentive humans, than inattentive ones.

Journal Reference:

  1. Juliane Kaminski, Andrea Pitsch, Michael Tomasello. Dogs steal in the darkAnimal Cognition, 2012; DOI:10.1007/s10071-012-0579-6

Pioneiro da epigenética fala sobre relação entre ambiente e genoma (Fapesp)

Moshe Szyf, da Universidade McGill, participa de simpósio internacional organizado pela FAPESP e pela Natura. Discussões do evento embasarão edital para a criação de centros de pesquisa (foto: Edu César)

Especiais
14/03/2013

Por Karina Toledo

Agência FAPESP – Um dos primeiros cientistas a sugerir que os hábitos de vida e o ambiente social em que uma pessoa está inserida poderiam modular o funcionamento de seus genes foi Moshe Szyf, professor de Farmacologia e Terapêutica da Universidade McGill, no Canadá.

Szyf também foi pioneiro ao afirmar que essa programação do genoma – que ocorre por meio de processos bioquímicos batizados de mecanismos epigenéticos – seria um processo fisiológico, uma espécie de resposta adaptativa ao ambiente que começa ainda na vida uterina.

Entre os mecanismos epigenéticos conhecidos, o mais comum e o mais estudado por Szyf é a metilação do DNA, que ocorre quando um conjunto de partículas de hidrogênio e carbono se agrupa na base de alguns genes e impede que eles se expressem.

Embora o processo seja fisiológico, pode se tornar patológico quando acontece no contexto errado. Por exemplo, quando os genes que deveriam nos proteger contra o câncer são desligados.

Pesquisas realizadas pelo grupo de Szyf e colaboradores nos últimos anos mostraram que o padrão de metilação do DNA pode ser alterado por fatores como a qualidade do cuidado materno nos primeiros anos de vida ou a exposição a maus-tratos na infância, criando marcas epigenéticas que perduram ao longo da vida.

Os resultados de alguns desses estudos foram apresentados por Szyf durante o Simpósio Internacional Integração Corpo-Mente-Meio, realizado na sede da FAPESP no dia 12 de março, em parceria com a Natura.

Em um trabalho de 2004, feito com o neurocientista Michael Meaney, também da Universidade McGill, foram comparados dois grupos de ratas: aquelas que tinham recebido lambidas frequentes de suas mães quando ainda eram bebês e aquelas que não haviam recebido cuidados maternos.

Os resultados mostraram que os animais lambidos pelas mães se tornaram adultos mais tranquilos. Isso porque o amor materno alterou os níveis de metilação nas regiões do hipocampo que regulam o gene do receptor de glicocorticoides, ou seja, alteraram a regulação dos níveis de hormônios do estresse durante toda a vida adulta.

Para mostrar que essa lógica se aplicava também a humanos, os pesquisadores da McGill se associaram ao Instituto Universitário de Saúde Mental Douglas, também do Canadá, e ao Instituto de Ciências Clínicas de Cingapura, para analisar cérebros de vítimas de suicídio.

Por meio de seus históricos médicos e de entrevistas com familiares, foi possível identificar entre os suicidas aqueles que tinham sofrido abuso severo durante a infância – seja verbal, sexual ou físico.

Os pesquisadores viram que nesse grupo que teve uma infância difícil os genes que regulam os receptores de glicocorticoides estavam 40% menos ativos quando comparados aos dos suicidas que não sofreram abuso e também quando comparados aos do grupo controle (pessoas que morreram por outras causas, como acidentes de carro).

Os resultados sugerem, portanto, que o abuso infantil deixou essas pessoas mais sensíveis aos danos causados pelo estresse no cérebro; eles foram publicados em 2009 na revista Nature Neuroscience.

Em outros estudos apresentados durante o evento, o cientista mostrou que o padrão de expressão dos genes também pode ser influenciado pela condição socioeconômica na infância e pelo estresse vivenciado pela mãe durante a gestação.

“O avanço no conhecimento sobre a relação entre o ambiente e o genoma ajuda a combater o determinismo genético, ou seja, aquela ideia de que, se você nasce com genes da inteligência, você será inteligente, e se você nasce com genes saudáveis, você será saudável, não importa o que você faça a respeito. Isso coloca mais peso em nossas escolhas. Mostra que temos controle enquanto pais, enquanto formuladores de políticas públicas e enquanto sociedade. Isso pode definir novos modelos para políticas públicas”, disse Szyf à Agência FAPESP.

Para o pesquisador, muitas coisas na prática médica e no cotidiano têm sido feitas sem levar em conta as consequências disso no futuro, mas o avanço no conhecimento sobre a epigenética deve mudar a atitude das pessoas.

“Quando eu era um jovem pai, a ideia predominante era deixar a criança chorar para ela aprender a se virar sozinha. Hoje não fazemos isso porque temos medo do estresse que isso vai causar e de suas consequências. Da mesma forma, temos feito fertilização in vitro, barriga de aluguel, cesarianas desnecessárias sem pensar muito sobre as consequências disso para a criança. Precisamos começar a avaliar o custo-benefício e tomar decisões conscientes, com base em informações”, defendeu.

No campo da medicina, a epigenética traz outras implicações importantes. Uma delas é a possibilidade de identificar biomarcadores que permitam identificar a população mais vulnerável a desenvolver doenças como câncer, infarto, pressão alta ou transtornos mentais.

“O maior desafio é encontrar formas de intervir antes que os sinais clínicos apareçam e a situação se deteriore. Por isso, é tão importante entender o que torna as pessoas vulneráveis. Esse conhecimento também vai nos guiar quanto ao tipo de intervenção mais adequada”, disse.

No rol das intervenções epigenéticas possíveis, afirmou Szyf, estão as drogas capazes de reverter as alterações no padrão de expressão dos genes – algo que já é feito na área de oncologia e começa a ser testado na área psiquiátrica.

Intervenções epigenéticas podem ser feitas também por meio de psicoterapia ou de políticas públicas que promovam a mudança do comportamento. “A grande revolução virá quando aprendermos como nos comportar para atingir o mesmo efeito que as drogas são capazes de promover. Descobrir como intervir no sistema de forma que se possa reverter adaptações epigenéticas adversas unicamente pelo comportamento”, afirmou.

Parceria entre FAPESP e Natura

O Simpósio Internacional Integração Corpo-Mente-Meio também contou com a participação do professor Paul Rozin, da Universidade da Pennsylvania (Estados Unidos), que falou sobre as perspectivas na área de Psicologia Positiva – definida como o estudo das forças e virtudes que permitem aos indivíduos e às comunidades prosperar.

Também participaram os brasileiros Silvia Koller, da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Mirian Galvonas Jasiulionis, da Universidade Federal de São Paulo (Unifesp), e Edson Amaro Júnior, da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP). Respectivamente, eles apresentaram o cenário nacional das pesquisas em Psicologia Positiva, Epigenética e Neurociências.

Segundo o diretor científico da FAPESP, Carlos Henrique de Brito Cruz, as discussões do evento vão embasar a elaboração de um edital que será lançado pela Fundação e pela Natura para a criação de um ou mais centros de pesquisa nos moldes do CEPID (Centros de Pesquisa, Inovação e Difusão), caso em que o financiamento pode durar até dez anos.

“Queremos aprender mais sobre os desafios relacionados a esses temas para que possamos definir como será o financiamento, qual é a melhor forma de montar a armadilha para o conhecimento e obter bons resultados. Nem sempre é simples acertar o relacionamento entre as pessoas das universidades e as pessoas das empresas. Sempre há objetivos não convergentes. Nossa tarefa é achar as convergências possíveis”, afirmou Brito Cruz.

Além do diretor científico da FAPESP, também participou da abertura do evento o diretor de Ciência e Tecnologia da Natura, Victor Fernandes. “Estamos aqui tentando entender qual é a interface científica entre três ciências muito relevantes: Neurosciência Comportamental, Psicologia Positiva e Epigenética. O objetivo é entender como o comportamento e o cotidiano influenciam o comportamento biológico e, em cima disso, buscar oportunidades de fomento à ciência e à inovação”, destacou.

Doing Business With a Parrot: Self-Control Observed in Cockatoos (Science Daily)

Mar. 13, 2013 — Alice Auersperg from the Department of Cognitive Biology from the University of Vienna and her team has for the first time succeeded in observing self-control in cockatoos.

The results of this research project appear in the current issue of the journal Biology Letters.

Waiting: a clever move

In the 1970’s, self-control of human infants was investigated using the prominent ‘Stanford Marshmallow Experiment’: the children were presented with a marshmallow and were told they could either eat it now or wait and receive a second one if the first one was still intact after a time delay of several minutes. Interestingly, children that were able to wait for the delayed reward showed greater success in adult life than the ones that ate the first marshmallow right away.

Schematic presentation of the Procedure: The birds were first shown both food types inside the open hands of the experimenter and are then allowed to pick up the item of lower quality. Thereafter the animals have to decide to either eat the lower quality food straight away or to wait out the time delay to earn the better food. (Credit: Image courtesy of University of Vienna)

The ability to anticipate a delayed gain is considered cognitively challenging since it requires not only the capacity to control an direct impulse but also to assess the gain’s beneficial value relative to the costs associated with having to wait as well as the reliability of the trader. Such abilities can be considered precursors of economic decision making and are rarely found outside humans. Only few, typically large-brained animals, have been shown to be able to inhibit the consumption of an immediate food reward in anticipation for a bigger one for more than one minute.

Speculative trading of the Goffin cockatoos

A new study at the University of Vienna, on an Indonesian cockatoo species — the Goffin’s cockatoo — showed notable results. “The animals were allowed to pick up an initial food item and given the opportunity to return it directly into the experimenter’s hand after an increasing time delay. If the initial food item had not been nibbled by this time, the bird received another reward of an even higher preferred food type or of a larger quantity than the initial food in exchange” explains Isabelle Laumer, who conducted the study at the Goffin Lab at the University of Vienna. “Although we picked pecan nuts as initial reward which were highly liked by the birds and would under normal circumstances be consumed straight away, we found that all 14 of birds waited for food of higher quality, such as cashew nut for up to 80 seconds,” she further reports.

Evolution of self-control

Alice Auersperg, the manager of the Vienna Goffin Lab says: “When exchanging for better qualities, the Goffins acted astonishingly like economic agents, flexibly trading-off between immediate and future benefits. They did so, relative not only to the length of delay, but also to the difference in trade value between the ‘currency’ and the ‘merchandise’: they tended to trade their initial items more often for their most preferred food, than for one of intermediate preference value and did not exchange in a control test in which the value of the initial item was higher than that of the expected one.” She adds: “While human infants or primates can hold the initial food in their hands, one should also consider that the birds were able to wait, although they had to hold the food in their beaks, directly against their taste organs while waiting. Imagine placing a cookie directly into a toddler’s mouth and telling him/her, he/she will only receive a piece of chocolate if the cookie is not nibbled for over a minute.”

Thomas Bugnyar, who previously conducted similar studies on ravens and crows, says, “Until recently, birds were considered to lack any self-control. When we found that corvids could wait for delayed food, we speculated which socio-ecological conditions could favor the evolution of such skills. To test our ideas we needed clever birds that are distantly related to corvids. Parrots were the obvious choice and the results on Goffins show that we are on the right track.”

Journal Reference:

  1. A. M. I. Auersperg, I. B. Laumer, T. Bugnyar. Goffin cockatoos wait for qualitative and quantitative gains but prefer ‘better’ to ‘more’Biology Letters, 2013; 9 (3): 20121092 DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2012.1092

The interspecies internet: Diana Reiss, Peter Gabriel, Neil Gershenfeld and Vint Cerf at TED2013 (TED)

Posted by: Kate Torgovnick 

February 28, 2013 at 8:13 pm EST

Photos: James Duncan Davidson
Photos: James Duncan Davidson

The internet connects people all over the world. But could the internet also connect us with dolphins, apes, elephants and other highly intelligent species?

In a bold talk in Session 10 of TED2013, four incredible thinkers come together to launch the idea of the interspecies internet. Each takes four minutes to talk, then passes the metaphorical baton, building the narrative in parts.

The talk begins with Diana Reiss, a cognitive psychologist who studies intelligence in animals. She shows us a video of an adorable dolphin twirling in the water. But the dolphin isn’t spinning playfully for the camera — the dolphin is watching itself in a two-way mirror.

“A dolphin has self-awareness,” says Reiss. “We used to think this was a uniquely human quality, but dolphins aren’t the only non-human animals to show self-recognition in a mirror. Great apes, our closest relatives, also show this ability.” Ditto for elephants and even magpies.

Reiss shares her work with dolphins — she’s been teaching them to communicate through an underwater keyboard of symbols that correspond to whistles and playful activities. Through this keyboard, the dolphins learned to perform activities on demand, and also to express their desire for them. (For more on how a similar dolphin keyboard works, read up on Denise Herzing’s talk from earlier today.)

TED2013_0065235_D41_2938

“You can’t get more alien than the dolphin. We’re separated by 95 million years of divergent evolution. These are true non-terrestrials,” says Reiss. “This self-organized learning, the same thing we heard from TED Prize winner Sugata Mitra. I’m suggesting this is our Hole in the Water.”

Reiss was conducting this work on her own. And then she got a call from iconic musician Peter Gabriel.

“I make noises for a living, and on a good day it’s music,” says Gabriel. He has always looked into the eyes of animals and wondered what is going on inside their heads, he says, soe excitedly read about research, like Reiss’, examining communication with animals.

“What was amazing to me was that [the animals] seemed a lot more adept at getting a handle on our language than we were at getting a handle on theirs,” says Gabriel. “I work with a lot of musicians from around the world. Often we don’t have any common language at all. We sit behind our instruments and it’s a way to connect.”

TED2013_0064754_DSC_8824

So Gabriel started cold-calling scientists to see if he could be a part of this work. His goal: To try writing music with an animal. And he got his chance.

In a video clip that raises oohs and ahhs from audience, Gabriel shares a video of a bonobo with a keyboard. While bonobos had been introduced to percussion instruments before, and bashed them with their fists, this was the first time this bonobo had ever seen a keyboard. And with accompaniment, she played truly amazing music.

“She discovers a note she likes. She finds the octave,” says Gabriel, narrating the beautiful melody in the video. “We began to dream … What would happen if we could somehow find new interfaces – visual, audio — to allow us to communicate with the remarkable beings we share the planet with.”

Gabriel brought the video of this unusual jam session to Neil Gershenfeld, the Director of MIT’s Center for Bits and Atoms.

TED2013_0064789_DSC_8859

“I lost it when I saw that clip,” says Gershenfeld, stepping up to the stage. “I was struck by the history of the internet, because it started as the internet of middle-aged white men … I realized that we humans had missed something — the rest of the planet.”

At this point, Gershenfeld video-conferenced in animals live — including orangutans in Waco, Texas, dolphins at the National Aquarium in Baltimore, and elephants in Thailand.

Gershenfeld is known for his work in the internet of things. And he thinks animals can be a part of it, too. ”We’re starting to think about how you integrate the rest of the biomass of the planet into the internet,” he says.

Which brings us to Vint Cerf, who helped lay the foundations for the internet as we know it and is now vice president and Chief Internet Evangelist for  Google.

TED2013_0065415_D41_3118

“Forty years ago we wrote the script of the internet. Thirty years ago we turned it on,” says Cerf. “We thought we were building a system to connect computers together. But we quickly learned that it’s a system for connecting people.”

“You know where this is going,” Cerf continues, to a laugh, bringing it back to research in communicating with animals. ”What’s important about what these people are doing: They’re beginning to learn how to communicate with species that are not us, but share a sensory environment. [They’re figuring out] what it means to communicate with something that’s not a person. I can’t wait to see these experiments unfold.”

So what’s next? The internet of things, yes, and the ability for us to communicate with computers without keyboards and mice. And in addition to the internet of species, he even imagines an interplanetary internet.

“These interactions with other animals will teach us, ultimately, how we might interact with an alien from another world,” says Cerf. “I can hardly wait.”

Cultural Evolution Changes Bird Song (Science Daily)

Jan. 29, 2013 — Thanks to cultural evolution, male Savannah sparrows are changing their tune, partly to attract “the ladies.”

Savannah sparrow. (Credit: Image courtesy of University of Guelph)

According to a study of more than 30 years of Savannah sparrows recordings, the birds are singing distinctly different songs today than their ancestors did 30 years ago — changes passed along generation to generation, according to a new study by University of Guelph researchers.

Integrative biology professors Ryan Norris and Amy Newman, in collaboration with researchers at Bowdoin College and Williams College in the U.S., analyzed the songs of male Savannah sparrows (Passerculus sandwichiensis) recorded over three decades, and found that the songs had changed distinctly from 1980 to 2011.

“The change is the result of cultural transmission of different song elements through many generations,” said Norris.

Norris added that the change in tune resembles changes in word choice and language among humans.

“If you listen to how people used to talk in the 1890s and how we talk today, you would notice major differences, and this is the result of shifts in culture or the popularity of certain forms,” he said. “The change in sparrow songs over time has occurred much the same way”

The sparrows, which live on Kent Island, N.B., in the Bay of Fundy, can generally sing only one song type that consists of several parts. Male sparrows learn that song early in their first year and continue to sing the same tune for the rest of their lives.

“Young male sparrows learn their songs from the birds around them,” said Norris. “It may be their fathers, or it could be other older male birds that live nearby.”

Each male sparrow has his own unique sound, added Newman.

“While the island’s sparrows all sing a characteristic ‘savannah sparrow song,’ with the same verses and sound similar, there are distinct differences between each bird,” she said. “Essentially, it is like karaoke versions of popular songs. It is the rise and fall in popular cover versions that has changed over time.”

The research team found that, in general, each song has three primary elements. The first identifies the bird as a Savannah sparrow, the second identifies which individual is singing, and the third component is used by females to assess males.

Using sonograms recorded from singing males each breeding season, the researchers determined that, while the introductory notes had stayed generally consistent for the last 30 years, the sparrows had added a series of clicks to the middle of their songs. The birds had also changed the ending trill: once long and high-frequency, it is now shorter and low-frequency.

“We found that the ending trill of the song has become shorter, likely because female sparrows preferred this, because males with shorter trills had higher reproductive success,” Norris said.

Kent Island has been home to the Bowdoin Scientific Station since it was donated by J. Sterling Rockefeller in 1932, and the birds have been recorded since the 1980s. Individual birds are also monitored throughout their lifetime.

“We know the identity and history of every single sparrow in the study population” said Norris, who has led the project with Newman since 2009. “To have 30 years of recordings is very rare, and it was definitely surprising to see such drastic changes.”

Journal Reference:

  1. Heather Williams, Iris I. Levin, D. Ryan Norris, Amy E.M. Newman, Nathaniel T. Wheelwright. Three decades of cultural evolution in Savannah sparrow songsAnimal Behaviour, 2013; 85 (1): 213 DOI:10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.10.028

Chimpanzees Successfully Play the Ultimatum Game: Apes’ Sense of Fairness Confirmed (Science Daily)

Jan. 14, 2013 — Researchers at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University, are the first to show chimpanzees possess a sense of fairness that has previously been attributed as uniquely human. Working with colleagues from Georgia State University, the researchers played the Ultimatum Game with the chimpanzees to determine how sensitive the animals are to the reward distribution between two individuals if both need to agree on the outcome.

Researchers have shown that chimpanzees possess a sense of fairness that has previously been attributed as uniquely human. (Credit: © Sunshine Pics / Fotolia)

The researchers say the findings, available in an early online edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) available this week, suggest a long evolutionary history of the human aversion to inequity as well as a shared preference for fair outcomes by the common ancestor of humans and apes.

According to first author Darby Proctor, PhD, “We used the Ultimatum Game because it is the gold standard to determine the human sense of fairness. In the game, one individual needs to propose a reward division to another individual and then have that individual accept the proposition before both can obtain the rewards. Humans typically offer generous portions, such as 50 percent of the reward, to their partners, and that’s exactly what we recorded in our study with chimpanzees.”

Co-author Frans de Waal, PhD, adds, “Until our study, the behavioral economics community assumed the Ultimatum Game could not be played with animals or that animals would choose only the most selfish option while playing. We’ve concluded that chimpanzees not only get very close to the human sense of fairness, but the animals may actually have exactly the same preferences as our own species.” For purposes of direct comparison, the study was also conducted separately with human children.

In the study, researchers tested six adult chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and 20 human children (ages 2 — 7 years) on a modified Ultimatum Game. One individual chose between two differently colored tokens that, with his or her partner’s cooperation, could be exchanged for rewards (small food rewards for chimpanzees and stickers for children). One token offered equal rewards to both players, whereas the other token favored the individual making the choice at the expense of his or her partner. The chooser then needed to hand the token to the partner, who needed to exchange it with the experimenter for food. This way, both individuals needed to be in agreement.

Both the chimpanzees and the children responded like adult humans typically do. If the partner’s cooperation was required, the chimpanzees and children split the rewards equally. However, with a passive partner, who had no chance to reject the offer, chimpanzees and children chose the selfish option.

Chimpanzees, who are highly cooperative in the wild, likely need to be sensitive to reward distributions in order to reap the benefits of cooperation. Thus, this study opens the door for further explorations into the mechanisms behind this human-like behavior.

For eight decades, the Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University, has been dedicated to conducting essential basic science and translational research to advance scientific understanding and to improve the health and well-being of humans and nonhuman primates. Today, the center, as one of only eight National Institutes of Health-funded national primate research centers, provides leadership, training and resources to foster scientific creativity, collaboration and discoveries. Yerkes-based research is grounded in scientific integrity, expert knowledge, respect for colleagues, an open exchange of ideas and compassionate quality animal care.

Within the fields of microbiology and immunology, neurologic diseases, neuropharmacology, behavioral, cognitive and developmental neuroscience, and psychiatric disorders, the center’s research programs are seeking ways to: develop vaccines for infectious and noninfectious diseases; treat drug addiction; interpret brain activity through imaging; increase understanding of progressive illnesses such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases; unlock the secrets of memory; determine how the interaction between genetics and society shape who we are; and advance knowledge about the evolutionary links between biology and behavior.

Journal Reference:

  1. Darby Proctor, Rebecca A. Williamson, Frans B. M. de Waal, and Sarah F. Brosnan. Chimpanzees play the ultimatum gamePNAS, January 14, 2013 DOI:10.1073/pnas.1220806110

Dogs Can Accurately Sniff out ‘Superbug’ Infections (Science Daily)

A new study finds that dogs can sniff out Clostridium difficile (the infective agent that is responsible for many of the dreaded “hospital acquired infections”) in stool samples and even in the air surrounding patients in hospital with a very high degree of accuracy. (Credit: © CallallooAlexis / Fotolia)

Dec. 13, 2012 — Dogs can sniff out Clostridium difficile (the infective agent that is responsible for many of the dreaded “hospital acquired infections”) in stool samples and even in the air surrounding patients in hospital with a very high degree of accuracy, finds a study in the Christmas issue published on bmj.com today.

The findings support previous studies of dogs detecting various types of cancer and could have great potential for screening hospital wards to help prevent C. difficile outbreaks, say the researchers.

C. difficile infection most commonly occurs in older people who have recently had a course of antibiotics in hospital, but it can also start in the community, especially in care homes. Symptoms can range from mild diarrhoea to a life-threatening inflammation of the bowel.

Early detection is vital to prevent transmission, but diagnostic tests can be expensive and slow, which can delay treatment for up to a week.

Diarrhoea due to C. difficile has a specific smell, and dogs have a superior sense of smell compared with humans. This prompted researchers in the Netherlands to investigate whether a dog could be trained to detect C. difficile.

A two-year old male beagle (called Cliff) was trained by a professional instructor to identify C. difficile in stool samples and in patients with C. difficile infection. He was taught to indicate the presence of the specific scent by sitting or lying down.

The dog had not been trained for detection purposes before.

After two months of training, the dog’s detection abilities were formally tested on 50 C. difficile positive and 50 C. difficilenegative stool samples. He correctly identified all 50 positive samples and 47 out of 50 negative samples.

This equates to 100% sensitivity and 94% specificity (sensitivity measures the proportion of positives correctly identified, while specificity measures the proportion of negatives correctly identified).

The dog was then taken onto two hospital wards to test his detection abilities in patients. He correctly identified 25 out of 30 cases (sensitivity 83%) and 265 out of 270 negative controls (specificity 98%).

The researchers add that the dog was quick and efficient, screening a complete hospital ward for the presence of patients with C. difficile infection in less than 10 minutes.

They point to some study limitations, such as the unpredictability of using an animal as a diagnostic tool and the potential for spreading infections via the dog, and say some unanswered questions remain.

However, they say their study demonstrates that a detection dog can be trained to identify C. difficile infection with a high degree of accuracy, both in stool samples and in hospitalised patients. “This could have great potential for C. difficileinfection screening in healthcare facilities and thus contribute to C. difficile infection outbreak control and prevention,” they conclude.

Journal Reference:

  1. M. K. Bomers, M. A. van Agtmael, H. Luik, M. C. van Veen, C. M. J. E. Vandenbroucke-Grauls, Y. M. Smulders. Using a dog’s superior olfactory sensitivity to identify Clostridium difficile in stools and patients: proof of principle studyBMJ, 2012; 345 (dec13 8): e7396 DOI:10.1136/bmj.e7396

Lully & nós (Valor)

23/11/2012 às 00h00

Por Joselia Aguiar | Para o Valor, de São Paulo

Daryan Dornelles/FolhapressCosta Lima ou Bruno Negri, que homenageia sua shitzu branca e preta: livro traz as reflexões filosófico-caninas capturadas por uma máquina inventada para traduzir “auês”

A obra podia entrar na prateleira reservada aos livros fofos, se tal existisse. O que existe, de verdade, é a chance de parar na lista de best-sellers como um “Marley & Eu” à brasileira. “Confesso minha ignorância: não sei que livro é esse, ‘Marley & Eu'”, responde o ficcionista novato Bruno Negri sobre uma possível influência ao escrever “Me chamo Lully”, seu relato de uma vidinha de cachorro que chega agora às livrarias – o lançamento, pela Book Makers, será no dia 5, na Livraria Argumento, no Leblon, no Rio. Vai ter jazz, MPB e coquetel para gente e bichos.

A ignorância confessada, que seria fatal em alguém que pretendesse fazer sucesso no metier dos livros comerciais – afinal, “Marley & Eu” foi lido por milhões no mundo inteiro -, pode ser vista como um divertido alheamento intencional ou uma saudável distância técnica, quando se conhece enfim a identidade de quem está disfarçado pelo pseudônimo. Bruno Negri é Luiz Costa Lima, de 75 anos, um dos críticos literários mais importantes do país, há quatro décadas em atividade, mais de 20 títulos publicados, obra premiada aqui e no exterior.

De parecido com o livro do jornalista americano John Grogan, que narrou as peripécias de seu Marley, há, além do tema, uma capa com seu apelo emotivo: em close, um cãozinho se apresenta com olhar sedutor. Aí param as semelhanças. A grande diferença se configura pelo ponto de vista. Marley teve a história contada por Grogan, seu dono. Lully, ao contrário, é autora da própria história. Pois um laboratório nos Estados Unidos desenvolveu equipamento ainda em fase de testes que captura o pensamento de animais e o decodifica em linguagem de humanos. Aparentemente, só com alguns o experimento parece funcionar, com outros o resultado não é o mesmo. Com Lully, cachorra filósofa, funciona. Não com Benjy, seu filho e companheiro, incapaz da concentração necessária, muito menos raciocínio organizado para ter o pensamento capturado ou decodificado. Benjy é, por assim dizer, um cão atávico – uma de suas raras preocupações é impedir que Lully brinque com uma bolinha, enquanto ele mesmo não parece saber o motivo de cultivar tal hábito, já que nunca aproveita o objeto furtado.

O grau de autoconsciência de Lully é evidente desde o título, retirado da primeira frase que diz à máquina, “Me chamo”, e não “Me chamam”. Lully sobretudo compreende que os fios que a conectam da cabeça ao computador transmitem seu “auês”, a língua que domina. A seu jeito canino – filosófico, mas ainda canino -, ela narra dos primeiros dias no canil até os oito anos na casa de Pedro, Joana e o filho, Dani. Lully pensa não só sobre as coisas que observa como também as coisas que sente: medo, um tipo de afeição que não sabe dar nome (seria amor? paixão? decerto não é cio), a maternidade e a finitude. O que ela nunca consegue compreender é a passagem do tempo – o que são mesmo os dias, semanas, passado e futuro – e a divisão de classe social – o que se nota pela dificuldade de entender o que é uma princesa, título que lhe atribuem, e o que são os mendigos catadores no pós-Carnaval do Rio.

Cachorrinha que inspirou o crítico é “faceira e sedutora como uma teenager”, apesar de já ter oito anos; sugestão para livro foi da mulher dele

As perguntas ao crítico se encaminham com a devida vênia. Das fábulas de La Fontaine às de Orwell, os livros protagonizados por bichos, o “Flush” de Virginia Woolf ou o “Timbuktu” de Paul Auster, o que um crítico conhecido pelo rigor e exigência pensou em fazer ao publicar um livro fofo? Algum experimento? “Não pensei em coisa alguma, senão em dar alguma verossimilhança à história que queria fosse de minha querida Lully.”

Eis que Lully existe mesmo. É a shitzu de oito anos da família. “Não pense que é brincadeira ou fingimento. Embora saiba de ficções sobre animais de estimação, nunca li nenhuma delas”, prossegue Costa Lima. “Só lhe garanto que não quis brincar com Lully. Ela nos é muito querida para sujeitá-la a uma brincadeira. Seria explorar sua admirável ingenuidade canina.”

O campo dos estudos animais, da animalidade, dos limites do humano tem crescido nas universidades: trata-se de área multidisciplinar, que combina filosofia, literatura, ciências sociais. Uma nova pergunta quer identificar se houve, da parte do professor emérito da PUC-SP, uma tentativa de se aproximar desse tipo de reflexão a partir da própria experiência. “Sei disso, de livros escritos há décadas por Günter Lorenz. Mas lhe confesso que nunca li nada a respeito.” O processo da escrita? A resposta não dá mais margem para teorizações previsíveis: “Simplesmente não houve”.

A sugestão veio da mulher, a psicanalista Rebeca Schwartz. Então ele se sentou à mesa e, como diz, escreveu como sempre faz: primeiro à mão, depois no computador. “Creio que as emendas foram mínimas. Era como se a história estivesse amadurecida dentro de mim.” De que modo o crítico agiu no escritor, desmontando e remontando a maquinaria ficcional? “Alguém já disse que a crítica que se limite a ser o julgamento de um livro é algo bastante chato. O crítico seria uma espécie semelhante aos juízes do nosso STF que têm seu instante de glória à custa do que outros fizeram”, pondera. Temos algo diferente, portanto. “Embora a crítica não seja e não deva ser ficção, ela só presta quando traz consigo um ‘impulso ficcional’. No “Me chamo Lully”, a máquina ficcional pôde se mostrar explicitamente, sem disfarces ou transformações.”

É aqui, leitor, nessa parte da conversa, que você se lembra que o tal aparelho recém-inventado nos Estados Unidos, aquele que captura e decodifica as reflexões filosófico-caninas de Lully, é pura ficção. Não por outra, críticos costumam ser vistos pelos leitores como “desmancha-prazeres”, como nota Costa Lima. As engrenagens se expõem para quem quiser ver.

A perspectiva de atrair um leitor quase oposto ao seu parece animadora, horrorosa ou engraçada? “Alguns por certo me dizem que o livro atrairá muitos leitores, algo bem diferente do que conheço com meus livros de teoria e crítica literária. Se isso se der, ficarei muito contente. Em vez de engraçada, a hipótese me parece surpreendente. Mas não creio que seja possível.”

Lully tem longuíssimos pelos lisos – por sua pelagem, a raça é identificada no nome original em chinês como o “cão leão” -, é pequenina – a espécie nunca ultrapassa os 25 cm – e, na descrição de seu dono, “faceira e sedutora como uma teenager”, apesar dos oito anos, idade da maturidade em sua categoria. “Melhor, mais do que a maioria das que vejo frequentar a PUC.”

Benjy, que também existe, tem no livro um nome falso. O verdadeiro é Billy. O cão é “meio bobão, manhoso e longe do charme de Lully”, descreve-o o dono bastante crítico (a palavra “crítico” no sentido comezinho), para mais à frente reconhecer a possibilidade de ter sido injusto no relato que faz do cão macho por uma inconsciente competição pela fêmea.

Se escrever o primeiro manuscrito lhe custou duas horas, foi só depois da leitura de Rebeca, mais minuciosa e atenta aos acréscimos, que vicissitudes da vidinha de cachorro puderam ser registradas – desde a ração antialergênica às bolinhas homeopáticas – e muitos episódios, recordados com exatidão, do treinamento avançado de artes marciais para cachorro às crises de pânico de Billy ao entrar num carro, o que fez o casal ter de se desfazer de uma casa de praia. Quase tudo o que é contado Lully de fato viveu, à exceção de um sequestro, este completamente fictício. E há mais uma coisa ou outra recriada. “A cena da paixão pelo vira-lata tem um fundo de verdade, mas é um tanto estilizada”, diz Costa Lima. De fato, esta já dava para notar.

Resta saber por que escolheu o nome de Bruno Negri. “Eu mesmo não sei!”, diz. “Talvez porque de imediato pensei o título como ‘Me Chiamo Lully’. Sei apenas que tanto Bruno como Negri pretendiam acentuar, direta ou indiretamente, a cor da ‘autobiografada’: branca com manchas negras. Mas, no fundo, o nome não tem maiores razões.” Existe razão, essa sim, para adotar um pseudônimo, como explica: “Temia que o nome do crítico prejudicasse a circulação do livro”.

A trajetória de crítico não se interrompe. Meses atrás, saiu o recente “A Ficção e o Poema”, pela Companhia das Letras, desdobramento de dois anteriores, “História. Ficção. Literatura” e “O Controle do Imaginário e o Romance”. Costa Lima conclui agora um novo volume, que se chamará “Frestas” e deve sair apenas em 2014. Outra notícia recente vem de fora: um dos seus livros clássicos, “Mímesis: Desafio ao Pensamento”, acaba de ter tradução para o mercado de língua alemã. E para Bruno Negri, há futuro literário? John Grogan fez vários na linha do “Marley & Eu”. “Não, não creio. Pode parecer louco. Mas tenho muitos projetos de livros longos e trabalhosos. ‘Me Chamo Lully’ foi um felicíssimo acidente. Ainda que não fosse difícil continuar a aventura ficcional, suponho que minha opção de vida é outra.”

© 2000 – 2012. Todos os direitos reservados ao Valor Econômico S.A. . Verifique nossos Termos de Uso em http://www.valor.com.br/termos-de-uso. Este material não pode ser publicado, reescrito, redistribuído ou transmitido por broadcast sem autorização do Valor Econômico. Leia mais em: http://www.valor.com.br/cultura/2914400/lully-nos#ixzz2E5M8kORc

Origin of intelligence and mental illness linked to ancient genetic accident (University of Edinburgh)

2-Dec-2012 – By Tara Womersley, University of Edinburgh

Scientists have discovered for the first time how humans – and other mammals – have evolved to have intelligence

Scientists have discovered for the first time how humans – and other mammals – have evolved to have intelligence.

Researchers have identified the moment in history when the genes that enabled us to think and reason evolved.

This point 500 million years ago provided our ability to learn complex skills, analyse situations and have flexibility in the way in which we think.

Professor Seth Grant, of the University of Edinburgh, who led the research, said: “One of the greatest scientific problems is to explain how intelligence and complex behaviours arose during evolution.”

The research, which is detailed in two papers in Nature Neuroscience, also shows a direct link between the evolution of behaviour and the origins of brain diseases.

Scientists believe that the same genes that improved our mental capacity are also responsible for a number of brain disorders.

“This ground breaking work has implications for how we understand the emergence of psychiatric disorders and will offer new avenues for the development of new treatments,” said John Williams, Head of Neuroscience and Mental Health at the Wellcome Trust, one of the study funders.

The study shows that intelligence in humans developed as the result of an increase in the number of brain genes in our evolutionary ancestors.

The researchers suggest that a simple invertebrate animal living in the sea 500 million years ago experienced a ‘genetic accident’, which resulted in extra copies of these genes being made.

This animal’s descendants benefited from these extra genes, leading to behaviourally sophisticated vertebrates – including humans.

The research team studied the mental abilities of mice and humans, using comparative tasks that involved identifying objects on touch-screen computers.

Researchers then combined results of these behavioural tests with information from the genetic codes of various species to work out when different behaviours evolved.

They found that higher mental functions in humans and mice were controlled by the same genes.

The study also showed that when these genes were mutated or damaged, they impaired higher mental functions.

“Our work shows that the price of higher intelligence and more complex behaviours is more mental illness,” said Professor Grant.

The researchers had previously shown that more than 100 childhood and adult brain diseases are caused by gene mutations.

“We can now apply genetics and behavioural testing to help patients with these diseases”, said Dr Tim Bussey from Cambridge University, which was also involved in the study.

The study was funded by the Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Council and European Union.

How animals predict earthquakes (BBC)

1 December 2011

By Victoria Gill – Science reporter, BBC Nature

Common toadCan pond-dwelling animals pick up pre-earthquake signals?

Animals may sense chemical changes in groundwater that occur when an earthquake is about to strike.

This, scientists say, could be the cause of bizarre earthquake-associated animal behaviour.

Researchers began to investigate these chemical effects after seeing a colony of toads abandon its pond in L’Aquila, Italy, in 2009 – days before a quake.

They suggest that animal behaviour could be incorporated into earthquake forecasting.

When you think of all of the many things that are happening to these rocks, it would be weird if the animals weren’t affected in some way” – Rachel GrantThe Open University

The team’s findings are published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. In this paper, they describe a mechanism whereby stressed rocks in the Earth’s crust release charged particles that react with the groundwater.

Animals that live in or near groundwater are highly sensitive to any changes in its chemistry, so they might sense this days before the rocks finally “slip” and cause a quake.

The team, led by Friedemann Freund from Nasa and Rachel Grant from the UK’s Open University hope their hypothesis will inspire biologists and geologists to work together, to find out exactly how animals might help us recognise some of the elusive signs of an imminent earthquake.

Strange behaviour

The L’Aquila toads are not the first example of strange animal behaviour before a major seismic event. There have been reports throughout history of reptiles, amphibians and fish behaving in unusual ways just before an earthquake struck.

STRANGE OR NOT

  • In July 2009, just hours after a large earthquake in San Diego, local residents discovered dozens of Humboldt squid washed up on beaches. These deep sea squid are usually found at depths of between 200 and 600m
  • At 5.58am on 28 June 1992 the ground began to shake in the Mojave Desert, California, right in the middle of a scientific study on desert harvester ants. Measurements revealed the ants did not change their behaviour at all during the earthquake, the largest to strike the US in four decades.

In 1975, in Haicheng, China, for example, many people spotted snakes emerging from their burrows a month before the city was hit by a large earthquake.

This was particularly odd, because it occurred during the winter. The snakes were in the middle of their annual hibernation, and with temperatures well below freezing, venturing outside was suicide for the cold-blooded reptiles.

But each of these cases – of waking reptiles, fleeing amphibians or deep-sea fish rising to the surface – has been an individual anecdote. And major earthquakes are so rare that the events surrounding them are almost impossible to study in detail.

This is where the case of the L’Aquila toads was different.

Toad exodus

Ms Grant, a biologist from the Open University, was monitoring the toad colony as part of her PhD project.

“It was very dramatic,” she recalled. “It went from 96 toads to almost zero over three days.”

Ms Grant published her observations in the Journal of Zoology.

“After that, I was contacted by Nasa,” she told BBC Nature.

Scientists at the US space agency had been studying the chemical changes that occur when rocks are under extreme stress. They wondered if these changes were linked to the mass exodus of the toads.

Their laboratory-based tests have now revealed, not only that these changes could be connected, but that the Earth’s crust could directly affect the chemistry of the pond that the toads were living and breeding in at the time.

Toads mating (c) Rachel GrantAll of the toads left the breeding colony days before the 2009 earthquake

Nasa geophysicist Friedemann Freund showed that, when rocks were under very high levels of stress – for example by the “gargantuan tectonic forces” just before an earthquake, they release charged particles.

These charged particles can flow out into the surrounding rocks, explained Dr Freund. And when they arrive at the Earth’s surface they react with the air – converting air molecules into charged particles known as ions.

“Positive airborne ions are known in the medical community to cause headaches and nausea in humans and to increase the level of serotonin, a stress hormone, in the blood of animals,” said Dr Freund. They can also react with water, turning it into hydrogen peroxide.

This chemical chain of events could affect the organic material dissolved in the pond water – turning harmless organic material into substances that are toxic to aquatic animals.

It’s a complicated mechanism and the scientists stress that it needs to be tested thoroughly.

But, Dr Grant says this is the first convincing possible mechanism for a “pre-earthquake cue” that aquatic, semi-aquatic and burrowing animals might be able to sense and respond to.

“When you think of all of the many things that are happening to these rocks, it would be weird if the animals weren’t affected in some way,” she said.

Dr Freund said that the behaviour of animals could be one of a number of connected events that might forecast an earthquake.

“Once we understand how all of these signals are connected,” he told BBC Nature, “if we see four of five signals all pointing in [the same] direction, we can say, ‘ok, something is about to happen’.”

*   *   *

Toads can ‘predict earthquakes’ and seismic activity

Wednesday, 31 March 2010

By Matt Walker 
Editor, Earth News

Common toad (Bufo bufo)

Common toads sense danger

Common toads appear to be able to sense an impending earthquake and will flee their colony days before the seismic activity strikes.

The evidence comes from a population of toads which left their breeding colony three days before an earthquake that struck L’Aquila in Italy in 2009.

How toads sensed the quake is unclear, but most breeding pairs and males fled.

They reacted despite the colony being 74km from the quake’s epicentre, say biologists in the Journal of Zoology.

It is hard to objectively and quantifiably study how animals respond to seismic activity, in part because earthquakes are rare and unpredictable.

Some studies have been done on how domestic animals respond, but measuring the response of wild animals is more difficult.

Even those that have been shown to react, such as fish, rodents and snakes tend to do so shortly before an earthquakes strikes, rather than days ahead of the event.

However, biologist Dr Rachel Grant of the Open University, in Milton Keynes, UK, was routinely studying the behaviour of various colonies of common toads on a daily basis in Italy around the time a massive earthquake struck.

Her studies included a 29-day period gathering data before, during and after the earthquake that hit Italy on 6 April 2009.

The quake, a 6.3-magnitude event, struck close to L’Aquila city, about 95km (60 miles) north-east of Rome.

Dr Grant was studying toads 74km away in San Ruffino Lake in central Italy, when she recorded the toads behaving oddly.

Five days before the earthquake, the number of male common toads in the breeding colony fell by 96%.

Common frogs (Rana temporaria) mating

That is highly unusual for male toads: once they have bred, they normally remain active in large numbers at breeding sites until spawning has finished.

Yet spawning had barely begun at the San Ruffino Lake site before the earthquake struck.

Also, no weather event could be linked to the toads’ disappearance.

Three days before the earthquake, the number of breeding pairs also suddenly dropped to zero.

While spawn was found at the site up to six days before the earthquake, and again six days after it, no spawn was laid during the so-called earthquake period – the time from the first main shock to the last aftershock.

“Our study is one of the first to document animal behaviour before, during and after an earthquake,” says Dr Grant.

She believes the toads fled to higher ground, possibly where they would be at less risk from rock falls, landslides and flooding.

Sensing danger

Exactly how the toads sense impending seismic activity is unclear.

The shift in the toads’ behaviour coincided with disruptions in the ionosphere, the uppermost electromagnetic layer of the earth’s atmosphere, which researchers detected around the time of the L’Aquila quake using a technique known as very low frequency (VLF) radio sounding.

Such changes to the atmosphere have in turn been linked by some scientists to the release of radon gas, or gravity waves, prior to an earthquake.

In the case of the L’Aquila quake, Dr Grant could not determine what caused the disruptions in the ionosphere.

However, her findings do suggest that the toads can detect something.

“Our findings suggest that toads are able to detect pre-seismic cues such as the release of gases and charged particles, and use these as a form of earthquake early warning system,” she says.

Ants ignore quakes

One other study has quantified an animal’s response to a major earthquake.

Researchers had the serendipitous opportunity to measure how the behaviour of the desert harvester ant (Messor pergandei) changed as the ground began to tremble in the Mojave Desert, California, on 28 June 1992.

The largest quake to hit the US in four decades struck during the middle of an ongoing study, which measured how many ants walked the trails to and from the colony, the distributions of worker ants and even how much carbon dioxide the ants produced.

However, in response to that 7.4 magnitude quake, the ants did not appear to alter their behaviour at all.

ITALIAN EARTHQUAKE

 

NIH Decision Signals the Beginning of the End for Medical Research on Chimps (Wired)

By Brandon Keim

September 21, 2012

Henry, one of the chimps at Chimp Haven. Image: Steven Snodgrass/Flickr

With the retirement of 110 government-owned chimpanzees, the end of medical research on man’s closest living relative may be near.

Today, the National Institutes of Health announced that all of its chimps now living at the New Iberia Research Center would be permanently removed from the research population.

Long criticized by animal advocates for mistreating animals and illegally breeding chimps, New Iberia operates the largest research chimp colony in the United States and is a bastion of a practice abandoned in every other country.

“This is a major message from the NIH: that this era is coming to an end,” said John Pippin of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, an animal advocacy group. “This is huge.”

In December of last year, an expert panel convened by the Institute of Medicine, the nation’s medical science advisers, declared that medical research on chimpanzees was ethically problematic and, in most cases, scientifically unnecessary. The NIH announced a moratorium on new chimp research funding and agreed to review the status of its own animals. After years of fighting for an end to medical research on chimps, whose ability to think, feel and suffer is not far removed from our own, animal advocates greeted that news with cautious relief. The NIH’s intentions sounded good, but what they’d actually do remained to be seen.

With the decision to retire 110 chimps at New Iberia, the NIH leaves little doubt of its plans. “This is a significant step in winding down NIH’s investment in chimpanzee research based on the way science has evolved and our great sensitivity to the special nature of these remarkable animals, our closest relatives,” said NIH director Francis Collins to the Washington Post.

‘They do not have scientific or ethical justification to continue.’
Excluding the retired chimpanzees, the NIH still owns an estimated 475 chimps eligible for research. Another 500 or so are owned by pharmaceutical companies. The NIH’s decisions influence their fate as well, said Pippin.

“With this indication that the NIH is going to get out of chimp research, that’s going to drop the bottom out of the whole chimpanzee research enterprise,” Pippin said. “How are you going to justify your research in light of what the IOM and NIH have said? Even those not directly affected by this prohibition are going to give up. They do not have scientific or ethical justification to continue.”

Kathleen Conlee, animal research director with the Humane Society of the United States, was more measured in her response.

“They’re taking a step in the right direction by deeming these chimps ineligible for research,” she said. “But we’d rather see them go to sanctuary.” She noted that while 10 of the New Iberia retirees will be sent to the Chimp Haven sanctuary, the rest will go to the Texas Biomedical Institute’s Southwest National Primate Research Center.

Though the newly retired chimps won’t be used again in medical research, that type of research still occurs at Southwest. Indeed, it was an attempt to send retired chimps back into research at Southwestthat sparked the controversy that led to the IOM report and NIH review.

“Places like Southwest were built to be research labs. We’d urge the chimps to be sent somewhere where the mission is the well-being of chimps,” Conlee said. According to Conlee, housing animals at Chimp Haven costs the government $40 per day, compared to $60 per day at research laboratories.

Conlee said that some companies, including Abbott Labs and Idenix, have agreed to follow the IOM guidelines for chimp research or abandon it altogether. Others, including GlaxoSmithKline, have already given up.

Rather than relying on corporate goodwill, however, both Conlee and Pippin urged people to support the Great Ape Protection Act and Cost Savings Act. Now under Congressional consideration, the bill would end on medical research on chimps.

Reciprocity an Important Component of Prosocial Behavior: Scorekeeping of Past Favors Isn’t, However, a Factor (Science Daily)

ScienceDaily (Sep. 3, 2012) — While exchanging favors with others, humans tend to think in terms of tit-for-tat, an assumption easily extended to other animals. As a result, reciprocity is often viewed as a cognitive feat requiring memory, perhaps even calculation. But what if the process is simpler, not only in other animals but in humans as well?

Researchers at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University, have determined monkeys may gain the advantages of reciprocal exchange of favors without necessarily keeping precise track of past favors. Malini Suchak, a graduate student at Emory University, and Frans de Waal, PhD, director of the Living Links Center at Yerkes and C.H. Candler Professor of Psychology at Emory, led the study. Their findings will appear in an Early Online Edition of theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences this week.

“Prosocial is defined as a motivation to assist others regardless of benefits for self, explained Suchak. “We used a prosocial choice test to study whether direct reciprocity could promote generosity among brown capuchin monkeys. We found one monkey willing to do another favors if the first monkey was the only one to choose, and we found the monkeys became even more prosocial if they could alternate and help each other. We did not find any evidence that the monkeys paid close attention to each other’s past choices, so they were prosocial regardless of what their partner had just done,” she continued.

Suchak and de Waal suggest the synchronization of the same actions in alternation creates a more positive attitude the same way humans who row a boat together or work toward a shared goal develop a more positive attitude about each other.

Another interesting finding according to the researchers is the capuchin monkeys were prosocial whether they were paired with a familiar partner from their own group {in-group} or a partner from a different social group {out-group}.

According to de Waal, “This research has several implications for better understanding human behavior. First, we observed an increase in prosocial behavior as a result of reciprocity, but the monkeys did not develop a contingency between their own and their partners’ behaviors. Like humans, the capuchins may have understood the benefits of reciprocity and used this understanding to maximize their own benefits. Second, that the capuchins responded similarly to in-group and out-group partners has implications for the commonly held view that humans are unique in their ability to cooperate with strangers,” de Waal explained.

According to the researchers, capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) are ideal subjects for this type of study given the numerous observations of cooperative and prosocial behavior in the field, their sensitivity to other monkeys’ efforts in coordination experiments, and their robust, spontaneous prosocial behavior in the prosocial choice test compared with, for example, chimpanzees, which seem more sensitive to methodological variables.

In this study, the researchers tested 12 brown capuchin monkeys in pairs on a prosocial choice task. The monkeys had the choice between a selfish token that benefited only them and a prosocial token that benefited themselves and a partner. By comparing each monkey’s behavior with a familiar partner from the monkey’s own group and a partner from a different social group, the researchers examined the influence of each monkey’s relationship outside the experimental context on prosocial behavior. There was no difference between in-group and out-group pairs in any of the test conditions. To test the role of reciprocity, the researchers allowed the monkeys to take turns making choices and found this greatly increased prosocial behavior, but the researchers did not observe any tit-for-tat behavior. The researchers also tested whether the monkeys could overcome their aversion for inequity by creating a situation in which both individuals could provide each other with superior rewards, making reciprocity an even more attractive strategy. The monkeys did, but again without keeping track of each other’s choices. Finally, through a series of control conditions, the researchers established the monkeys were responding to their partners’ behaviors, rather than the rewards delivered by their partners, and that the monkeys understood the values of the tokens and were flexibly responding to changing conditions throughout the test sessions.

This research opens several avenues for future research, including further examining the emergence of reciprocity among humans without the cognition required for tit-for-tat and the tendency to cooperate with out-group partners.

Journal Reference:

  1. Malini Suchak and Frans B. M. de Waal. Monkeys benefit from reciprocity without the cognitive burden.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2012; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1213173109