Evolution of schooling drives changes in neuroanatomy and motion characteristics across predation contexts in guppies

One of the most spectacular displays of social behavior is the synchronized movements that many animal groups perform to travel, forage and escape from predators. However, elucidating the neural mechanisms underlying the evolution of collective behaviors, as well as their fitness effects, remains challenging. Here, we study collective motion patterns with and without predation threat and predator inspection behavior in guppies experimentally selected for divergence in polarization, an important ecological driver of coordinated movement in fish. We find that groups from artificially selected lines remain more polarized than control groups in the presence of a threat. Neuroanatomical measurements of polarization-selected individuals indicate changes in brain regions previously suggested to be important regulators of perception, fear and attention, and motor response. Additional visual acuity and temporal resolution tests performed in polarization-selected and control individuals indicate that observed differences in predator inspection and schooling behavior should not be attributable to changes in visual perception, but rather are more likely the result of the more efficient relay of sensory input in the brain of polarization-selected fish. Our findings highlight that brain morphology may play a fundamental role in the evolution of coordinated movement and anti-predator behavior.

A multi-scale review of the dynamics of collective behaviour: from rapid responses to ontogeny and evolution

Collective behaviours, such as flocking in birds or decision making by bee colonies, are some of the most intriguing behavioural phenomena in the animal kingdom. The study of collective behaviour focuses on the interactions between individuals within groups, which typically occur over close ranges and short timescales, and how these interactions drive larger scale properties such as group size, information transfer within groups and group-level decision making. To date, however, most studies have focused on snapshots, typically studying collective behaviour over short timescales up to minutes or hours. However, being a biological trait, much longer timescales are important in animal collective behaviour, particularly how individuals change over their lifetime (the domain of developmental biology) and how individuals change from one generation to the next (the domain of evolutionary biology). Here, we give an overview of collective behaviour across timescales from the short to the long, illustrating how a full understanding of this behaviour in animals requires much more research attention on its developmental and evolutionary biology. Our review forms the prologue of this special issue, which addresses and pushes forward understanding the development and evolution of collective behaviour, encouraging a new direction for collective behaviour research. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'Collective behaviour through time'.

Adding the neuro to cognition: from food storing to nest building

Typically, investigations of animal cognition couple careful experimental manipulations with examination of the animal's behavioural responses. Sometimes those questions have included attempts to describe the neural underpinnings of the behavioural outputs. Over the past 25 years, behaviours that involve spatial learning and memory (such as navigation and food storing) has been one context in which such dual or correlated investigations have been both accessible and productive. Here I review some of that work and where it has led. Because of the wealth of data and insights gained from that work and song learning before it, it seems that it might also be useful to try to add some neurobiology to other systems in animal cognition. I finish then, with a description of recent work on the cognition and neurobiology of avian nest building. It is still relatively early days but asking questions about the cognition of nest building has already shown both neural correlates of nest building and that learning and memory play a much greater role in this behaviour than previously considered. While it is not yet clear how putting these components together will be synergistic, the examples of song learning and food storing provide encouragement. Perhaps this might be true for other behaviours too?

Context is Key: Social Environment Mediates the Impacts of a Psychoactive Pollutant on Shoaling Behavior in Fish

Behavior-modifying drugs, such as antidepressants, are increasingly being detected in waterways and aquatic wildlife around the globe. Typically, behavioral effects of these contaminants are assessed using animals tested in social isolation. However, for group-living species, effects seen in isolation may not reflect those occurring in realistic social settings. Furthermore, interactions between chemical pollution and other stressors, such as predation risk, are seldom considered. This is true even though animals in the wild are rarely, if ever, confronted by chemical pollution as a single stressor. Here, in a 2 year multigenerational experiment, we tested for effects of the antidepressant fluoxetine (measured concentrations [±SD]: 42.27 ± 36.14 and 359.06 ± 262.65 ng/L) on shoaling behavior in guppies (Poecilia reticulata) across different social contexts and under varying levels of perceived predation risk. Shoaling propensity and shoal choice (choice of groups with different densities) were assessed in a Y-maze under the presence of a predatory or nonpredatory heterospecific, with guppies tested individually and in male-female pairs. When tested individually, no effect of fluoxetine was seen on shoaling behavior. However, in paired trials, high-fluoxetine-exposed fish exhibited a significantly greater shoaling propensity. Hence, effects of fluoxetine were mediated by social context, highlighting the importance of this fundamental but rarely considered factor when evaluating impacts of environmental pollution.

Mid-sized groups perform best in a collective decision task in sticklebacks

Numerous studies have reported functional improvements in collective behaviour with increasing group size, however, the possibility that such improvements may saturate or even decline as group size continues to grow have seldom been tested experimentally. Here, we tested the ability of solitary three-spined sticklebacks and those in groups, ranging from 2 to 29 fish, to leave an unfavourable patch of habitat. Our results replicate the findings of previous studies at low group sizes, with the fish initially showing a reduction in their latency to leave the unfavourable habitat as group size increased. As group size continued to increase, however, latency to leave the habitat increased, so that the functional relationship between group size and latency to depart was U-shaped. Our results suggest an optimum group size in this context of between 12 and 20 fish. Underlying this group-level trend was a similar U-shaped relationship between group size and the first fish to leave the habitat, suggesting that at larger group sizes, social conformity to the behaviour of the majority can stifle the ability of fish to innovate-in this case, to induce a collective movement from the unfavourable habitat.

Collective decision making by rational individuals

The patterns and mechanisms of collective decision making in humans and animals have attracted both empirical and theoretical attention. Of particular interest has been the variety of social feedback rules and the extent to which these behavioral rules can be explained and predicted from theories of rational estimation and decision making. However, models that aim to model the full range of social information use have incorporated ad hoc departures from rational decision-making theory to explain the apparent stochasticity and variability of behavior. In this paper I develop a model of social information use and collective decision making by fully rational agents that reveals how a wide range of apparently stochastic social decision rules emerge from fundamental information asymmetries both between individuals and between the decision makers and the observer of those decisions. As well as showing that rational decision making is consistent with empirical observations of collective behavior, this model makes several testable predictions about how individuals make decisions in groups and offers a valuable perspective on how we view sources of variability in animal, and human, behavior.