Cargando…

Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites

BACKGROUND: Learning processes can be broadly categorized into associative and non-associative. Associative learning occurs through the pairing of two previously unrelated stimuli, whereas non-associative learning occurs in response to a single stimulus. How these two principal processes compare in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schausberger, Peter, Peneder, Stefan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5237478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28088215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12898-016-0112-x
_version_ 1782495533815824384
author Schausberger, Peter
Peneder, Stefan
author_facet Schausberger, Peter
Peneder, Stefan
author_sort Schausberger, Peter
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Learning processes can be broadly categorized into associative and non-associative. Associative learning occurs through the pairing of two previously unrelated stimuli, whereas non-associative learning occurs in response to a single stimulus. How these two principal processes compare in the same learning task and how they contribute to the overall behavioural changes brought about by experience is poorly understood. We tackled this issue by scrutinizing associative and non-associative learning of prey, Western flower thrips Frankliniella occidentalis, by the predatory mite, Neoseiulus californicus. We compared the behaviour of thrips-experienced and -naïve predators, which, early in life, were exposed to either thrips with feeding (associative learning), thrips without feeding (non-associative learning), thrips traces on the surface (non-associative learning), spider mites with feeding (thrips-naïve) or spider mite traces on the surface (thrips-naïve). RESULTS: Thrips experience in early life, no matter whether associative or not, resulted in higher predation rates on thrips by adult females. In the no-choice experiment, associative thrips experience increased the predation rate on the first day, but shortened the longevity of food-stressed predators, a cost of learning. In the choice experiment, thrips experience, no matter whether associative or not, increased egg production, an adaptive benefit of learning. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that both non-associative and associative learning forms operate in foraging predatory mites, N. californicus. The non-rewarded thrips prey experience produced a slightly weaker, but less costly, learning effect than the rewarded experience. We argue that in foraging predatory mites non-associative learning is an inevitable component of associative learning, rather than a separate process. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12898-016-0112-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5237478
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52374782017-01-18 Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites Schausberger, Peter Peneder, Stefan BMC Ecol Research Article BACKGROUND: Learning processes can be broadly categorized into associative and non-associative. Associative learning occurs through the pairing of two previously unrelated stimuli, whereas non-associative learning occurs in response to a single stimulus. How these two principal processes compare in the same learning task and how they contribute to the overall behavioural changes brought about by experience is poorly understood. We tackled this issue by scrutinizing associative and non-associative learning of prey, Western flower thrips Frankliniella occidentalis, by the predatory mite, Neoseiulus californicus. We compared the behaviour of thrips-experienced and -naïve predators, which, early in life, were exposed to either thrips with feeding (associative learning), thrips without feeding (non-associative learning), thrips traces on the surface (non-associative learning), spider mites with feeding (thrips-naïve) or spider mite traces on the surface (thrips-naïve). RESULTS: Thrips experience in early life, no matter whether associative or not, resulted in higher predation rates on thrips by adult females. In the no-choice experiment, associative thrips experience increased the predation rate on the first day, but shortened the longevity of food-stressed predators, a cost of learning. In the choice experiment, thrips experience, no matter whether associative or not, increased egg production, an adaptive benefit of learning. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that both non-associative and associative learning forms operate in foraging predatory mites, N. californicus. The non-rewarded thrips prey experience produced a slightly weaker, but less costly, learning effect than the rewarded experience. We argue that in foraging predatory mites non-associative learning is an inevitable component of associative learning, rather than a separate process. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12898-016-0112-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5237478/ /pubmed/28088215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12898-016-0112-x Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Schausberger, Peter
Peneder, Stefan
Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites
title Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites
title_full Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites
title_fullStr Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites
title_full_unstemmed Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites
title_short Non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites
title_sort non-associative versus associative learning by foraging predatory mites
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5237478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28088215
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12898-016-0112-x
work_keys_str_mv AT schausbergerpeter nonassociativeversusassociativelearningbyforagingpredatorymites
AT penederstefan nonassociativeversusassociativelearningbyforagingpredatorymites