variation in emotion and cognition among fishes felicity huntingford & victoria braithwaite...
TRANSCRIPT
Variation in emotion and cognition among fishes
Felicity Huntingford & Victoria Braithwaite
University of Glasgow, Glasgow, U.K.Penn State University, PA, U.S.A.
Requested topics• What are the cognitive capacities of fish and do
fish experience emotions?• Are the answers the same for different kinds of
fish? • If not, what are the implications for fish welfare?
• Concepts of cognition and emotion
• Kinds of evidence for cognitive and emotional capacity in non-human animals
• Status of the evidence for fish
• Variability in cognitive and emotional capacity among fish
• Implications for welfare
Issues to address
About definitions of welfare
• To address public concern fully requires consideration of not just the functional responses fish make to challenge but also what they feel
• Nor easy, because ultimately it is impossible to know what a fish (or any non-human animal) feels
• The best we can do is to gather as many sources of indirect evidence as possible about their emotions and cognitive capacities and draw deductions from these.• Hence this meeting?
Emotion and cognition
Emotion: Psychological processes arising when an animal experiences something as positive or rewarding or negative/punishing. Evolved adaptations, enabling animals to gain rewards or desirable resources and to avoid danger and harm. “Adaptive, motivational affective states”Cognition: The processes by which an animal internalises information about past experience and present conditions and adapts subsequent behaviour accordingly. Involves perception, learning and memory
Interpretation of information, which depends on past experience, changes with emotional state, which in turn alters in response to interpreted information
EMOTION PERCEPTION LEARNING & MEMORY
COGNITIVE PROCESSES
COGNITION
Many links between emotion & cognition
Where does welfare come in?
Evidence for cognitive and emotional capacity in non-human animals
Central nervous system: homologous brain machinery to that known to control cognition and emotions in humans?• Neuroanatomy• Neurochemistry
Behaviour (and physiology)
Brain: behaviour links
• Response to negative or positive stimuli• Priorities and choices• Ability to learn• Complexity and flexibility
• Goal directedness• Anticipation
Burns: The capacity to “guess and fear”
Status of fish: neuroanatomy • The lateral and medial pallial regions
of the teleost forebrain are homologous to the mammalian hippocampus and amygdala, which are involved in learning and emotions in mammals, even though they develop in a different way Broglio et al. 2003, 2005.
• Caution is required about using such evidence (either way) based on structure alone: assumes equivalence of function over evolutionary time
Status of fish: neurochemistryDopaminergic and serotoninergic systems in fish
Panula et al 2010
Green = dopaminergic Dark blue = noradrenergic Orange = serotoninergic
Behavioural complexity: status of fish Well developed capacity for learning
Trace Pavlovian conditioning with reinforcer devaluationNordgreen et al. 2009.
0
2
4
6
8
10
1 2 3 4 5
Late
ncy
to f
eed
(sec
)
Training Devaluation
No shockShock
Trace avoidance conditioning Portavella et al 2002.
Complex, flexible behaviour indicative of well developed cognitive capacity
• Groupers and eels
• Reciprocity. Tit-for-tat
• Bystanders and transitive inference
Transitive inference: A>B B>C C>D D>E so B>D etc
Grosenick et al. 2007
What about positive emotions?
• Removal of ectoparasite• Appetance for aggression• Nests and goal directedness
• Self-control/impulse control• Optimal diet choice • Reverse reward contingency
Danisman et al 2010
Complex, flexible behaviour
Status of fish: brain-behaviour links Evidence from lesion experiments that the hippocampus-
and amygdala-equivalents play a role in learning and emotions respectively in fish
Duran et al 2010
Proximal cues removed
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Sham MPX LPX
Spa
tial a
ccur
acy
inde
x
Broglio et al 2005
Summary of forebrain function in fish and mammals
Striking similarity of function
Evidence for role of dopamine in reward and learning in fish
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
Bef
ore-
afte
r tim
e (s
ec)
Control SP25 SP50 SP50 +DAant
UnpairedPaired
Matioli et al. 1993
Reinforcing effects of SP (dopamine) administration
Matioli et al. 1997
50
150
250
350
450
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Tim
e to
find
food
(sec
)
SP
SP+DAant
Train Test Rev1 Rev2 Rev3 Rev4
SP (dopamine) mediation of discrimination learning
• Concepts of cognition and emotion• Evidence for cognitive and emotional capacity
in non-human animals• Status of the evidence for fish
• Variability in cognitive and emotional capacity among fish• Implications for welfare
Fish are not mindless robots responding to challenge by simple reflexes with no emotional or cognitive contentThey are capable of complex behaviour indicative of complex cognitive abilitiesStill to make an explicit link between cognitive and emotional status and capacity for suffering or pleasure in fish: work so far necessary but not sufficient
So far:
Variability in emotional and cognitive capacity potentially has implications for welfare
Sources of variability in emotional and cognitive capacity among fishWithin species
• Gender• Life history stage• Life history strategy • Population/strain• Individuals
Between species
Within species: gender
• Dramatic remodelling of brain biochemistry and behaviour when fish change sex
Larson et al 2003
0
1
2
3
4
1 2 3 4
Days from start of sex change
Bioa
min
e acti
vity NE
DAMedial pallium
Female MaleNon territorial Territorial
• Gender differences in emotional (and possibly cognitive) capacities, certainly in adults but even in juveniles
Within species: life history stage
Harvey & Brown 2004
As fish grow, they move through predation windows
% c
hang
e fr
om c
ontr
ol
Moving Spines raised Feed latency
With associated changes in risk and response to it
In piscivorous species, above a certain size, prey become predators
Time over year 1
Perc
enta
ge in
die
t
•Differences in age ofmaturity and mating strategy within cohorts•Striking differences inbehaviour
Kolm et al. 2009
Within species: life history strategy
1.6
1.65
1.7
Mature parr Anadromous
Rela
tive
cere
bellu
m si
ze
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
MMP MA FMP FA
Rela
tive
brai
n siz
e
Gender and mating strategy
Male FemaleParr Anad Parr Anad
• Differences in relative size of whole brain and cerebellum in male and female trout adopting different mating strategies
Within species: individual stress coping styles
Adrenaline
Noradrenaline
Dopamine
Adrenaline Brelin et al. 2008
• Two kinds of wild brown trout• Differ in risk-taking and aggression• And in stress physiology• “Proactive” and “reactive”
• Different proportions of proactive and reactive fish in laboratory-reared trout from large, stocked river and small, unstocked streams.
Within species: populations
% p
roac
tive
fish
Brelin et al. 2008
• Associated with differences in response to hypoxia
100-70 50 30 20 Oxygen saturation (%)
Esc
ape
attem
pts/
min
Within species: population differences in learning
Braithwaite & Girvan 2003
Sticklebacks from river and pond populations given the opportunity to find food using visual landmarks or direction of water flow
0
20
40
60
80
100
River Pond
LandmarksFlow
Per
cen
tag
e o
f f
ish
• River fish use flow• Pond fish use landmarks
• Because of indeterminate growth rates and flexible sex determination (among other things), in fish more than in other vertebrates there is much variation in behaviour, physiology and brain function within a species.
• This is relevant to welfare, generating different responses to important challenges, with associated differences in mortality risk .
So far:
Between species: emotion and cognition
Differences in learning: 3 spined sticklebacks, but not 9 spined sticklebacks, alter their behaviour in response to paternal chases
Response to predation risk: 3 and 9 spined sticklebacks. Differences in response to risk (fear) in many contexts related to relative predation risk.
Even among closely related teleosts, emotional responses and cognitive capacities are variable, in relation to ecological factors.
Between species: overall brain size
• Striking variability in overall brain size. • Largely due to body size• But not entirely
Sharks
Teleosts
Pelagic fish
Linsey & Collin 2006
Between species: specific brains regions
And in rates of evolution of different brain regions (Tanganyikan cichlids)
Olfactory bulbTelencephalon
Gonzales-Voyer et al 2006
Difference in relative size of brain regions North American shiners %
var
iabi
lity
Kotreschal et al. 1998
Partly related to taxonomy
Ray finned fish
Lobe finned fish
Partly related to ecology
Trophic status
• Cichlids that feed on sessile food items have larger brains than those feeding on motile prey. Gonzalez-Voyer et al. 2009
• In fish generally, prey species have larger brains that do their associated predators
• Larger-brained predators tend to hunt larger-brained prey.
• Complicated relationship between trophic level and brain size Kondoh 2009.
Brain/body size prey
Bra
in/b
ody
size
pre
dato
r
Social organisation
Pollen et al. 2007 Stumway 2008
• In Tanganyka cichlids, the telencephalon tends to be larger in mongamous than polygamous species. • Monogamous species have greater visual acuity, but fewer social interactions.
Habitat complexity is associated with a larger cerebellum (more complex movement) and telencephalon (additional computational capacity) Pollen et al. 2007
Habitat complexity
Telencephalon
RockSand
Cerebellum
RockSand
Rock dwelling species have a relatively larger telecephalon and cerebellum, better visual acuity and better ability to use spatial cues to find food.
Shumway 2008a
0
800
1600
2400
3200
1 2 3 4Ti
me
to fi
nd (s
ec)
Rock
Sand
Landmark
Telen
Cereb
Midbr
Hypoth
Brain
Medulla
Olf bulb
Some conclusions • Not clear how much of this variability represents inherited adaptation and how much is the effect of plasticity in brain growth. • Level of analysis is still very crude.• Size is not everything.
• All the same, comparative studies of brain, ecology and behaviour throw light on the selective forces that shape the evolution of brain structure and of cognitive ability. • Evolutionary biologists can (are starting to be able to) predict from taxonomy, habitat, diet and social organisation how complex a fish’s brain and behaviour are likely to be.
So what? Implications of this variability for welfare
Linking welfare to cognition and emotion Welfare scientists can use variability in emotion, cognition
and underlying brain machinery in fish (both between and within species) to probe the difficult relationship between behavioural complexity, brain structure and welfare.
EMOTION PERCEPTION LEARNING & MEMORY
COGNITIVE PROCESSES
COGNITION
Where does welfare come in?
• The is no “one size fits all” answer to the general question of whether fish can suffer of feel pleasure. This will depend in any given case on the general cognitive and emotional capacity of the species (and life history stage etc) concerned.
Implications of this variability for welfare: Can fish suffer and enjoy?
• Nor is there a single answer to the specific question of what circumstances will cause a given species of fish suffering or pleasure. This will depend on specific cognitive and emotional systems of the species (and life history stage etc) concerned.
• Does what is known about variable emotional and cognitive capacities in fish help in drawing a line between animals whose welfare does and does not matter?
Almost certainly not, partly because a clear line probably does not exist and partly because we do not have sufficiently precise tools to locate it (yet?). But fish might be ranked by susceptibility to poor welfare
• Could we perhaps get to the point of having “look up” tables for which species, strain or life history stage and life history strategy to use for any given purpose to minimise suffering?
Almost certainly not, but thinking about this might help to identify the important gaps in knowledge
Choosing subjects for welfare-friendly exploitation?