Tinbergen revisited: a replication and extension of experiments on the beak colour preferences of herring gull chicks

Nest sanitation behavior does not increase the likelihood of parasitic egg rejection in herring gulls

Birds’ behavioral response to brood parasitism can be influenced not only by evolution but also by context and individual experience. This could include nest sanitation, in which birds remove debris from their nests. Ultimately, nest sanitation behavior might be an evolutionary precursor to the rejection of parasitic eggs. Proximately, the context or experience of performing nest sanitation behavior might increase the detection or prime the removal of parasitic eggs, but evidence to date is limited. We tested incubation-stage nests of herring gulls Larus argentatus to ask whether nest sanitation increased parasitic egg rejection. In an initial set of 160 single-object experiments, small, red, blocky objects were usually rejected (18 of 20 nests), whereas life-sized, 3D-printed herring gull eggs were not rejected whether red (0 of 20) or the olive-tan base color of herring gull eggs (0 of 20). Next, we simultaneously presented a red, 3D-printed gull egg and a small, red block. These nests exhibited frequent nest sanitation (small, red block removed at 40 of 48 nests), but egg rejection remained uncommon (5 of those 40) and not significantly different from control nests (5 of 49) which received the parasitic egg but not the priming object. Thus, performance of nest sanitation did not shape individuals’ responses to parasitism. Interestingly, parents were more likely to reject the parasitic egg when they were present as we approached the nest to add the experimental objects. Depending on the underlying mechanism, this could also be a case of experience creating variation in responses to parasitism.

Nine Levels of Explanation : A Proposed Expansion of Tinbergen's Four-Level Framework for Understanding the Causes of Behavior

Tinbergen's classic "On Aims and Methods of Ethology" (Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 20, 1963) proposed four levels of explanation of behavior, which he thought would soon apply to humans. This paper discusses the need for multilevel explanation; Huxley and Mayr's prior models, and others that followed; Tinbergen's differences with Lorenz on "the innate"; and Mayr's ultimate/proximate distinction. It synthesizes these approaches with nine levels of explanation in three categories: phylogeny, natural selection, and genomics (ultimate causes); maturation, sensitive period effects, and routine environmental effects (intermediate causes); and hormonal/metabolic processes, neural circuitry, and eliciting stimuli (proximate causes), as a respectful extension of Tinbergen's levels. The proposed classification supports and builds on Tinbergen's multilevel model and Mayr's ultimate/proximate continuum, adding intermediate causes in accord with Tinbergen's emphasis on ontogeny. It requires no modification of Standard Evolutionary Theory or The Modern Synthesis, but shows that much that critics claim was missing was in fact part of Neo-Darwinian theory (so named by J. Mark Baldwin in The American Naturalist in 1896) all along, notably reciprocal causation in ontogeny, niche construction, cultural evolution, and multilevel selection. Updates of classical examples in ethology are offered at each of the nine levels, including the neuroethological and genomic findings Tinbergen foresaw. Finally, human examples are supplied at each level, fulfilling his hope of human applications as part of the biology of behavior. This broad ethological framework empowers us to explain human behavior-eventually completely-and vindicates the idea of human nature, and of humans as a part of nature.