Literature DB >> 33515306

Different effects of reward value and saliency during bumblebee visual search for multiple rewarding targets.

Vivek Nityananda1,2, Lars Chittka3.   

Abstract

Several animals, including bees, use visual search to distinguish targets of interest and ignore distractors. While bee flower choice is well studied, we know relatively little about how they choose between multiple rewarding flowers in complex floral environments. Two factors that could influence bee visual search for multiple flowers are the saliency (colour contrast against the background) and the reward value of flowers. We here investigated how these two different factors contribute to bee visual search. We trained bees to independently recognize two rewarding flower types that, in different experiments, differed in either saliency, reward value or both. We then measured their choices and attention to these flowers in the presence of distractors in a test without reinforcement. We found that bees preferred more salient or higher rewarding flowers and ignored distractors. When the high-reward flowers were less salient than the low-reward flowers, bees were nonetheless equally likely to choose high-reward flowers, for the reward and saliency values we used. Bees were also more likely to attend to these high-reward flowers, spending higher inspection times around them and exhibiting faster search times when choosing them. When flowers differed in reward, we also found an effect of the training order with low-reward targets being more likely to be chosen if they had been encountered during the more immediate training session prior to the test. Our results parallel recent findings from humans demonstrating that reward value can attract attention even when targets are less salient and irrelevant to the current task.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attention; Bee; Flower constancy; Visual search

Year:  2021        PMID: 33515306     DOI: 10.1007/s10071-021-01479-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Cogn        ISSN: 1435-9448            Impact factor:   3.084


  24 in total

1.  Fine colour discrimination requires differential conditioning in bumblebees.

Authors:  Adrian G Dyer; Lars Chittka
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2004-02-27

2.  How does reward compete with goal-directed and stimulus-driven shifts of attention?

Authors:  Alexia Bourgeois; Rémi Neveu; Dimitri J Bayle; Patrik Vuilleumier
Journal:  Cogn Emot       Date:  2015-09-24

3.  Value-driven attentional capture.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson; Patryk A Laurent; Steven Yantis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-06-06       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Pop-out in visual search of moving targets in the archer fish.

Authors:  Mor Ben-Tov; Opher Donchin; Ohad Ben-Shahar; Ronen Segev
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2015-03-10       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 5.  Neurobiology of value-driven attention.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2018-11-13

6.  The locus of interference in the perception of simultaneous stimuli.

Authors:  J Duncan
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1980-05       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 7.  Categorization of visual stimuli in the honeybee Apis mellifera.

Authors:  Julie Benard; Silke Stach; Martin Giurfa
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2006-08-15       Impact factor: 3.084

8.  Visual predators select for crypticity and polymorphism in virtual prey.

Authors:  Alan B Bond; Alan C Kamil
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-02-07       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 9.  Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: a failed theoretical dichotomy.

Authors:  Edward Awh; Artem V Belopolsky; Jan Theeuwes
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2012-07-12       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  Learned value magnifies salience-based attentional capture.

Authors:  Brian A Anderson; Patryk A Laurent; Steven Yantis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.