The smell of hunger: Norway rats provision social partners based on odour cues of need.
Journal
PLoS biology
ISSN: 1545-7885
Titre abrégé: PLoS Biol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101183755
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2020
03 2020
Historique:
received:
16
09
2019
accepted:
19
02
2020
entrez:
26
3
2020
pubmed:
26
3
2020
medline:
16
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
When individuals exchange helpful acts reciprocally, increasing the benefit of the receiver can enhance its propensity to return a favour, as pay-offs are typically correlated in iterated interactions. Therefore, reciprocally cooperating animals should consider the relative benefit for the receiver when deciding to help a conspecific. Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus) exchange food reciprocally and thereby take into account both the cost of helping and the potential benefit to the receiver. By using a variant of the sequential iterated prisoner's dilemma paradigm, we show that rats may determine the need of another individual by olfactory cues alone. In an experimental food-exchange task, test subjects were provided with odour cues from hungry or satiated conspecifics located in a different room. Our results show that wild-type Norway rats provide help to a stooge quicker when they receive odour cues from a hungry rather than from a satiated conspecific. Using chemical analysis by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), we identify seven volatile organic compounds that differ in their abundance between hungry and satiated rats. Combined, this "smell of hunger" can apparently serve as a reliable cue of need in reciprocal cooperation, which supports the hypothesis of honest signalling.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32208414
doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000628
pii: PBIOLOGY-D-19-02720
pmc: PMC7092957
doi:
Substances chimiques
Volatile Organic Compounds
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e3000628Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Evolution. 2011 Mar;65(3):900-6
pubmed: 21361918
Physiol Behav. 1988;42(2):119-24
pubmed: 3368530
J Evol Biol. 2006 Sep;19(5):1365-76
pubmed: 16910958
J Agric Food Chem. 2011 Apr 13;59(7):3406-13
pubmed: 21391670
BMC Evol Biol. 2012 Mar 29;12:41
pubmed: 22455399
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016 Feb 5;371(1687):20150090
pubmed: 26729930
Biol Lett. 2015 Feb;11(2):20140959
pubmed: 25716088
Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Jan 02;280(1753):20122573
pubmed: 23282995
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 Oct 26;96(22):12644-9
pubmed: 10535976
J Theor Biol. 1964 Jul;7(1):1-16
pubmed: 5875341
Curr Biol. 2013 Jun 3;23(11):R486-8
pubmed: 23743416
J Comp Psychol. 2009 Aug;123(3):231-41
pubmed: 19685964
Evol Anthropol. 2013 Jul-Aug;22(4):186-95
pubmed: 23943272
Primates. 2011 Jul;52(3):237-47
pubmed: 21416218
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Dec 11;104(50):19762-6
pubmed: 18077409
Food Chem Toxicol. 2002 Oct;40(10):1459-62
pubmed: 12387309
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016 Feb 5;371(1687):20150084
pubmed: 26729924
PLoS Biol. 2007 Jul;5(7):e196
pubmed: 17608566
Chembiochem. 2017 Jul 18;18(14):1391-1395
pubmed: 28447367
J Comp Psychol. 2018 May;132(2):119-129
pubmed: 29528665
Proc Biol Sci. 2011 May 7;278(1710):1405-13
pubmed: 20980301
Physiol Behav. 2007 May 16;91(1):166-72
pubmed: 17408705
J Nutr. 1991 Nov;121(11):1730-7
pubmed: 1941180
Science. 2006 Dec 8;314(5805):1560-3
pubmed: 17158317
PLoS One. 2009 Oct 14;4(10):e7416
pubmed: 19826478
Proc Biol Sci. 2013 Aug 14;280(1768):20131615
pubmed: 23945693
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Mar 22;108(12):5116-21
pubmed: 21383191