PDF (Español (España))
FLIP
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
Current theories that attempt to explain mating preferences have placed particular emphasis on genetic determinants. They state that sexual preferences of females and sexual features of males evolve concurrently given the fact that male features are a reliable indicator of the presence of “good genes” which favor offspring survival. An alternative hypothesis explains mating preferences by means of a learning mechanism. An example of this approach is the theory of learning by imprinting proposed by Konrad Lorenz. This experiment aimed to evaluate the effects of different types of early breeding practices on later mating preferences. For this purpose, 35 quail chicks, 15 days old, were selected and split into four groups: (1) a group of 9 male chicks which were individually raised in the company of a mature three months old female; (2) a group of 9 female chicks which were individually raised in the company of a mature three months old male; (3) a group of 9 male chicks, which were raised alone in individual cages and without visual contact with other members of their species; and (4) a group of 8 female chicks which were raised alone in individual cages and without visual contact with others of their species. Subjects were exposed to these conditions for a period of three months. Later, each one of the animals underwent a mating preference test where the time that an animal spent observing a potential partner (the partner the chick had been raised with and a different partner) was measured during a 10-minutes trial for10 days. Results show that 50 percent of the18 chicks that formed the groups of males and females raised in a pair fashion, presented significant differences in mating preferences (23 percent in favor of the breeding partner and 27 percent in favor of a different partner). But in the group of 17 chicks that were placed in the condition of individualized breeding, only 12 percent of the male chicks showed significant differences in their preference for a specific partner. When comparing the various rearing conditions by means of an ANOVA, significant differences were obtained between them: F (7,663) = 2,072, P <0, 05. The results of this experiment suggest that rearing conditions have a differential effect on males and females in terms of mating preferences and seem to have a greater impact on females.
References
Adkins-Regan, E. (1998). Hormonal mechanisms of mate choice. American Zoologist, 38, 166-178.
Anderson, M. (1994). Sexual selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Andersson, M. (1986). Evolution of condition-dependent sex ornaments and mating preferences: Sexual selection based on viability differences. Evolution, 40, 804-816.
Ardila, R. (1975). Imprinting sexual. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 7, 289-297.
Ardila, R, (1967). Trabajos experimentales sobre los efectos de las experiencias tempranas en la conducta posterior. Revista de Psicología, 10, 85-91.
Ball, G. F. & Balthazart, J. (2001). Ethological concepts revisited: Immediate early gene induction in response to sexual stimuli in birds. Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 57, 252-270.
Balthazart, J. & Ball, G. F. (1998). New insights into the regulation and function of brain estrogen synthesis (aromatase). Trends in Neurosciences, 21, 243-249.
Balthazart, J. & Absil, P. (1997). Identification of catecholaminergic inputs to and outputs from aromatase-containing brain areas of the Japanese quail by tract tracing combined with tyrosine hydroxylase immunocytochemistry. Journal Comparative Neurology, 382, 401-428.
Balthazart, J. (1983). Hormonal correlates of behavior. En D. S. Farner et al. (Ed.), Avian biology, Vol. VII, pp. 221- 366. London – Nueva York: Academic Press.
Bateman, A. J. (1948). Intra-sexual selection in Drosophila. Heredity, 2, 349-368.
Bateson, P. P. G. (1966). The characteristics and context of imprinting. Biological Reviews, 41, 171-220.
Bateson, P. (1983). Optimal outbreeding. En P. Bateson (Ed.), Mate choice. Cambridge, MA:
Bateson, P. (1982). Preferences for cousins in Japanese quail. Nature, 295, 236-237. University Press, pp. 257-277.
Beach, F. A. (1956). Characteristics of masculine “sex drive”. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 4, 1-32.
Berglund, A., Bisazza, A. & Pilastro, A. (1996). Armaments and ornaments: An evolutionary explanation of traits of dual utility. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 58, 385-399.
Bischof, H. J. (1994). Sexual imprinting as a two-stage process. En J. A. Hogan & J. Bolhuis (Ed.), Causal mechanisms of behavioural development (pp. 82-97). Cambridge: University Press.
Bolhuis, J. J. (1989). The development and stability of filial preferences in the chick. University of Groningen. Disertación doctoral no publicada.
Borgia, G. (1979). Sexual selection and the evolution of mating systems. In M. S. Blum & N. A. Blum (Eds.), Sexual selection and reproductive competition in insects. (p. 19-80). Nueva York: Academic Press.
Clutton-Brock, T. H., & Parker, G. A. (1995). Sexual coercion in animal societies. Animal Behavior, 49, 1245-1365.
Craig, W. (1908). The voices of pigeons regarded as a means of social control. American Journal of Sociology, 14, 86-100.
Darwin, C. (1871/1989). El origen del hombre. Madrid: EDAF, S.A.
Dawkins, R. & Krebs. J. R. (1978). Animal Signals: Information or manipulation? En Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary approach, edited by J. R. Krebs and N. B. Davies. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer, pp. 380-402.
Domjan, M., Cusato, B., & Villarreal, R. (2000). Pavlovian feed-forward mechanisms in control of social behavior. Behavioral and Brain Science, 23, 235-249.
Domjan, M., Lyons, R., North, N. C. & Bruell, J. (1986). Sexual Pavlovian conditioned approach behavior in male Japanese quail. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 100, 413-421.
Eliasson, M. & Meyerson, B. (1981). Development of sociosexual approach behavior in male laboratory rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 95, 160-165.
Fabricius, E. (1962). Some aspects of imprinting. Animal Behavior, 10, 181-182.
Fantz, R. (1954). Object preferences and pattern vision in newly hatched chicks. Tesis de doctorado no publicada, University of Chicago.
Follet, B.K., Milette, J.J. (1982). Photoperiodism in quail: Testicular grow and maintenance under skelton photoperiods. Journal Endocrinology, 93, 83-90.
Galef, B. G. & With, D. J. (1998). Mate-choice copying in Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica). Animal Behavior, 55, 542-552.
Gibson, E. J. (1991). An odyssey in learning and perception. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gunther, L. M., Miller, R. R. & Matute, H. (1997). CSs and USs: What’s the difference? Journal Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 23, 15-30.
Gutierrez, G. & Domjan, M. (1996). Learning and male-male sexual competition in Japanese quail (Cutornix Japonica). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 110, 170-175.
Gutierrez, G. & Domjan, M. (1997). Differences in the sexual conditioned behavior of male and female Japanese quail (Cutornix Japonica). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 111, 135-142.
Hamilton, W. D. & Zuk, M. (1982). Heritable true fitness and bright birds: A role for parasites? Science, 4570 (218), 384-387.
Hebb, D. O. (1949). The Organization of Behavior. Nueva York: Wiley.
Hess, E. H. (1959). The relationship between imprinting and motivation. En M. R. Jones. (dir), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Hollis, K. L. (1982). Pavlovian conditioning of signal-centered action patterns and autonomic behavior: a biological analysis of function. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 12, 1-64.
Hollis, K. L. (1990). The role of Pavlovian conditioning in territorial aggression and reproduction. En D. Dewsbury (Ed.), Contemporary Issues in Comparative Psychology. pp. 197-219. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
Hollis, K. L. (1997). Contemporary research on Pavlonian condi tioning: a “new” functional analysis. American Psychologist, 52, 956-965.
Hollis, K. L., Ten Cate, C. & Bateson, P. P. G. (1991). Stimulus representation: subprocess of imprinting and conditioning. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 105, 307-317.
Hutchison, J. R., & Hutchison, R. E. (1983). Hormonal mechanisms of mate choice in birds. En P. Bateson (Ed.), Mate choice, pp. 389-406. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Irwin, D. E. & Price, T. (1999). Sexual imprinting learning and speciation. Heredity, 82, 347-354.
Johnson, W. A. & Tiefer, L. (1972). Sexual preferences in neonatally castrated golden hamsters. Hormones and Behavior, 9, 213-218.
Lorenz, K. Z (1935). Der kumpan in der Umweld des Vogels; die Artenosse als auslosende Moment Sozialer Verhaltungswiesen. Journal Fur Ornithologie. 83, 137-214.
Llinás, R. (2003). El cerebro y el mito del yo. El papel de las neuronas en el pensamiento y el comportamiento humano. Bogotá: Norma.
McBride, T. C. & Lickliter, R. (1993). Social experience with siblings fosters species -specific responsiveness to maternal visual cues in Bobwhite Quail Chicks (Colinus virginianus). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 107, 320-327.
McGregor, P. K. & Peake, T. (2000). Communication networks: Social environments for receiving and signaling behaviour. Acta Ethologica, 2, 71-81.
Meyerson, B. J. & Lindström, L. H. (1973). Sexual motivation in the female rat: A methodological study applied to the effect of estradiol benzoate. Acta Physiology. Scand. Supplement. 389, 1-80.
Nosofky, R. M. (1991). Test of an exemplar model for relating perceptual classification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perceptual Performance, 17, 3-27.
Owens, I. P. F., Rowe, C. & Thomas, A. L. R. (1999). Sexual selection, speciation and imprinting: separating the sheep from the goats. Tree, 14, 131-132.
Pavlov, I. P. (1997). Los reflejos condicionados (A. Gallardo, trad.). Madrid, España: Morata. (Trabajo original publicado en 1927).
Pfaus, J. G. (1996). Frank A. Beach Award - Homologies of animal and human sexual behaviors. Hormones and Behavior, 30, 187-200.
Premack, D. (1965). Reinforcement Theory. En D. Levine (Dir.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.(Vol. 13 pp. 123-1809. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Persaud, K. & Galef, B. G., Jr. (2003). Female Japanese quail aggregate to avoid sexual harassment by conspecific males: A possible cause of conspecific cueing. Animal Behaviour, 65, 89-94.
Pilastro, A., Benetton, S., & Bisazza, A. (2003). Female aggregation and male competition reduce costs of sexual harassment in the mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki). Animal Behaviour, 65, 1161-1167.
Price, T. (1998). Sexual selection and natural selection in bird speciation. Philosophical. Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B. 353, 251-260.
Pruett-Jones, S. (1992). Independent versus nonin dependent mate choice: Do females copy each other? The American Naturalist, 140, 1000-1009.
Qvarnström, A. & Price, T. D. (2001). Maternal effects, paternal effects and sexual selection. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 16, 95-100.
Salzen, E. A. (1962). Imprinting and fear. Animal Behaviour, 10, 183.
Scott, J. P, (1962), Critical periods in behavioral development. Science, 138, 949-957.
Shettleworth, S. J. (1984). Function and mechanism in learning. En M. D. Zeiler, P. Harzem (Eds.) Advances in Analysis of Behavior. 3, 1-39. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Intersci.
Signoret, J. P. (1970). Reproductive behaviour of pigs. Journal of Reproductive Fertility Supplement, 11, 105-117.
Suboski, M. D. (1988). Acquisition and social communication of stimulus recognition by fi sh. Behavioural Processes, 16, 213-244.
Suboski, M. D. (1989). Recognition learning in birds. Perspectives in Ethology, 8, 137-171.
Sluckin, W. (1964). Imprinting and early learning. Londres: Methuen.
Sullivan, M. S. (1994). Mate choice as an information gathering process under a time constraint: Implications for behaviour and signal design. Animal Behaviour, 47, 141-151.
Ten Cate, C. & Bateson, P. P. G. (1989). Sexual imprinting and preference for “supernormal” partners in Japanese quail. Animal Behaviour, 38, 356-358.
Travers, S. E., & Sih, A. (1991). The influence of starvation and predators on the mating behavior of a semiaquatic insect. Ecology, 72, 2123-2136.
Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. En B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man. Chicago: Aldine.
Vos, D. R. (1995). Sexual imprinting in zebra-finch females: Do females develop a preference for males that look like their father? Ethology, 99, 252-262.
Wingfi eld, J. C., Whaling, C. S. & Marler, P. (1994). Communication in vertebrate aggression and reproduction: The role of hormones. En E. Knobil, J. D. Neill, G. S. Greenwald, C. L. Markert, & D. W. Pfaff (Eds.), Physiology of mammalian reproduction, vol. 2, 2nd ed. Pp. 303-342. Nueva York: Raven Press.
Zahavi. A. (1975). Mate selection – a selection for a handicap. Journal of theoretical Biology, 53, 205-214.
Zahavi, A., & Zahavi, A. (1997). The Handicap Principle: A missing piece of Darwin’s Puzzle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zuk, M. (1994). Immunology and the evolution of behavior. En L. A. Real (Ed.), Behavioral mechanisms in evolutionary ecology, pp. 354-370. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
