4.5 Article

Who are the innovators? A field experiment with 2 passerine species

Journal

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 6, Pages 1241-1248

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arr120

Keywords

age differences; innovation; personality; problem solving; social learning; state

Funding

  1. Royal Society
  2. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  3. Biotechnological and Biological Sciences Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ecological and evolutionary drivers of innovativeness among species are relatively well studied, but the significance of similar variation within species is much less well understood. Using automated foraging devices, we conducted the first large-scale study of novel problem-solving performance in a wild bird population to test whether variation in innovativeness can be explained by inherent individual differences and by factors related to the necessity drives innovation'' hypothesis. We detected 20145 visits by 236 great tits (Parus major) and blue tits (Cyanistes caeruleus) and found consistent individual differences in the propensity to solve and in the time spent at devices between successive solutions in the field. Although individuals that were successful in a similar version of the task in captivity solved 3 times faster in the wild than those that were unsuccessful in captivity, success in captivity did not predict success in the wild. Thus, innovative propensity varies among individuals but it is also context dependent. Juveniles were more likely to solve the problem in the wild than adults, supporting the necessity drives innovation hypothesis. We found no evidence for social learning at problem-solving devices in the wild. The consistent individual differences in novel problem-solving performance we report suggest that innovativeness may be of adaptive significance within our population. Our results also suggest that selection for innovativeness may occur primarily among juveniles.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available