Abstract
Biological displays are often symmetrical, and there is growing evidence that receivers are sensitive to these symmetries. One explanation for the evolution of such sensitivity is that symmetry reflects the quality of the signaller. An alternative is that the sensitivity may arise as a by-product of general properties of biological recognition systems. In line with the latter idea, simulations of the recognition process based on simple, artificial neural networks have suggested that generalization can give rise to preferences for particular symmetrical stimuli. However, it is not clear from these studies exactly how the preferences emerge, and to what extent the results are relevant to biological recognition systems. Here, we employ a different class of recognition models (gradient interaction models) to demonstrate more clearly how generalization can generate a preference for symmetrical variants of a display. We also point out that the predictions of the gradient interaction and network-based models regarding the effects of generalization closely match the results from empirical studies of stimulus control. Our analysis demonstrates that the effects of generalization cannot be ignored when studying the evolution of symmetry preferences and symmetric signals.
Keywords: Signalling Receiver Psychology Fluctuating Asymmetry Sexaul Selection Mate Choice
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (90.3 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Barlow H. B., Reeves B. C. The versatility and absolute efficiency of detecting mirror symmetry in random dot displays. Vision Res. 1979;19(7):783–793. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(79)90154-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Blough D. S. Generalization gradient shape and summation in steady-state tests. J Exp Anal Behav. 1969 Jan;12(1):91–104. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1969.12-91. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Enquist M., Arak A. Symmetry, beauty and evolution. Nature. 1994 Nov 10;372(6502):169–172. doi: 10.1038/372169a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hollard V. D., Delius J. D. Rotational invariance in visual pattern recognition by pigeons and humans. Science. 1982 Nov 19;218(4574):804–806. doi: 10.1126/science.7134976. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Johnstone R. A. Female preference for symmetrical males as a by-product of selection for mate recognition. Nature. 1994 Nov 10;372(6502):172–175. doi: 10.1038/372172a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- KALISH H. I., GUTTMAN N. Stimulus generalization after equal training on two stimuli. J Exp Psychol. 1957 Feb;53(2):139–144. doi: 10.1037/h0047916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- KALISH H. I., GUTTMAN N. Stimulus generalization after training on three stimuli: a test of the summation hypothesis. J Exp Psychol. 1959 Apr;57(4):268–272. doi: 10.1037/h0046433. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Møller A. P. Bumblebee preference for symmetrical flowers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 Mar 14;92(6):2288–2292. doi: 10.1073/pnas.92.6.2288. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Møller A. P. Female swallow preference for symmetrical male sexual ornaments. Nature. 1992 May 21;357(6375):238–240. doi: 10.1038/357238a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Parsons P. A. Fluctuating asymmetry: an epigenetic measure of stress. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1990 May;65(2):131–145. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1990.tb01186.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Turner C. E., Barth G. P., Brown M. A., Champion M., Clark T., Gregg F. M., Gruenberg B. C., Keene C. H., McCaffrey H., McCombs C. E., McCurdy J. H., Nesbitt C. T., Peterson A. E., Shaw E. A. Report of the Committee on School Health Program. Am J Public Health (N Y) 1922 Mar;12(3):207–211. doi: 10.2105/ajph.12.3.207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]