Development and the origin of behavioral strategies

Developmental explanation and the ontogeny of birdsong: Nature/nurture redux

Despite several decades of criticism, dichotomous thinking about behavioral development (the view that the behavioral phenotype can be partitioned into inherited and acquired components) remains widespread and influential. This is particularly true in study of birdsong development, where it has become increasingly common to diagnose songs, elements of songs, or precursors of songs (song templates) as either innate or learned on the basis of isolation-rearing experiments. The theory of sensory templates has encouraged both the dichotomous approach (by providing a role for genetic blueprints to guide song learning) and an emphasis on structural rather than functional aspects of song development. As a result, potentially important lines of investigation have been overlooked and the interpretation of existing data is often flawed. Evidence for a genetic origin of behavioraldifferencesis frequently interpreted as evidence for the genetic determination of behavioralcharacters. The technique of isolation rearing remains the methodology of choice for many investigators, despite the fact that it offers only a rather crude analysis of the contribution of experience to song development and provides no information at all about genetic contributions to development. The latter could in principle be elucidated by the application of developmental-genetic techniques, but it is unlikely that these can easily be applied to the study of birdsong. Because developmental questions are so often posed in terms of the learned–innate dichotomy, “experience” is taken to be synonymous with “learning” and the possible role of nonobvious contributions to song development has largely been ignored. An alternative approach, based on Daniel Lehrman's interactionist theory of development, permits a more thorough appreciation of the problems that have yet to be addressed, and provides a more secure conceptual foundation for theories of song development.

Spontaneous tool use and sensorimotor intelligence in Cebus compared with other monkeys and apes

Spontaneous tool use and sensorimotor intelligence in Cebus were observed to determine whether tool use is discovered fortuitously and learned by trial-and-error or, rather, whether advanced sensorimotor abilities (experimentation and insight) are critical in its ontogeny and evolution.

Neophenogenesis: a developmental theory of phenotypic evolution

An important task for evolutionary biology is to explain how phenotypes change over evolutionary time. Neo-Darwinian theory explains phenotypic change as the outcome of genetic change brought about by natural selection. In the neo-Darwinian account, genetic change is primary; phenotypic change is a secondary outcome that is often given no explicit consideration at all. In this article, we introduce the concept of neophenogenesis: a persistent, transgenerational change in phenotypes over evolutionary time. A theory of neophenogenesis must encompass all sources of such phenotypic change, not just genetic ones. Both genetic and extra-genetic contributions to neophenogenesis have their effect through the mechanisms of development, and developmental considerations, particularly a rejection of the commonly held distinction between inherited and acquired traits, occupy a central place in neophenogenetic theory. New phenotypes arise because of a change in the patterns of organism-environment interaction that produce development in members of a population. So long as these new patterns of developmental interaction persist, the new phenotype(s) will also persist. Although the developmental mechanisms that produce the novel phenotype may change, as in the process known as "genetic assimilation", such changes are not necessary in order for neophenogenesis to occur, because neophenogenetic theory is a theory of phenotypic, not genetic, change.