Search

Supplementary tables S1 and S2 (data analysis results without interpolated points)

Approaches to understanding adaptive behaviour often assume that animals have perfect information about environmental conditions or are capable of sophisticated learning. If such learning abilities are costly, however, natural selection will favour simpler mechanisms for controlling behaviour when faced with uncertain conditions. Here, we show that, in a foraging context, a strategy based only on current energy reserves often performs almost as well as a Bayesian learning strategy that integrates all previous experiences to form an optimal estimate of environmental conditions. We find that Bayesian learning gives a strong advantage only if fluctuations in the food supply are very strong and reasonably frequent. The performance of both the Bayesian and the reserve-based strategy are more robust to inaccurate knowledge of the temporal pattern of environmental conditions than a strategy that has perfect knowledge about current conditions. Studies assuming Bayesian learning are often accused of being unrealistic; our results suggest that animals can achieve a similar level of performance to Bayesians using much simpler mechanisms based on their physiological state. More broadly, our work suggests that the ability to use internal states as a source of information about recent environmental conditions will have weakened selection for sophisticated learning and decision-making systems.

SummaryConflict between groups (intergroup conflict) is common in many social species [1–4] and is widely discussed as an evolutionary driver of within-group dynamics and social structure [2, 5]. However, empirical studies investigating the impacts of intergroup conflict have focused on the immediate aftermath [6–9], when behavioral changes may be the direct result of elevated stress levels [7] or territorial exclusions [9]. Demonstrations of longer-term effects, with behavioral changes persisting once increases in stress have diminished and full access to resources is again possible, would support proposed links to individual fitness and social evolution. Here we show that conflicts between neighboring groups of cooperatively breeding green woodhoopoes (Phoeniculus purpureus) have a lasting influence on decisions concerning roost cavities, a limiting resource vital for survival and breeding. Groups involved in extended conflicts in the morning were more likely to return to the zone of conflict that evening, roosting closer to territorial borders, than when intergroup interactions were short or did not occur. Extended morning conflicts also increased the likelihood that groupmates roosted together and preened one another at the roost, suggesting that intergroup conflict promotes consensus decision-making, social bonding, and group cohesion. Border roost use and allopreening increased more following conflicts that were lost rather than won. By demonstrating that both the intensity and outcome of intergroup interactions affect resource defense and associated within-group behavior many hours later, our results begin to bridge the gap between the immediate impacts of intergroup conflict and its role in social evolution.

Throughout history and in societies all over the world, parents have tried to influence the love lives of their children — with mixed success. Parents and children frequently don’t see eye to eye on what makes a suitable partner, as studies across cultures have confirme