Optimality model

Last updated

In biology, optimality models are a tool used to evaluate the costs and benefits of different organismal features, traits, and characteristics, including behavior, in the natural world. This evaluation allows researchers to make predictions about an organism's optimal behavior or other aspects of its phenotype. Optimality modeling is the modeling aspect of optimization theory. It allows for the calculation and visualization of the costs and benefits that influence the outcome of a decision, and contributes to an understanding of adaptations. The approach based on optimality models in biology is sometimes called optimality theory. [1]

Contents

Optimal behavior is defined as an action that maximizes the difference between the costs and benefits of that decision. Three primary variables are used in optimality models of behavior: decisions, currency, and constraints. [2] Decision involves evolutionary considerations of the costs and benefits of their actions. Currency is defined as the variable that is intended to be maximized (ex. food per unit of energy expenditure). It is the driving factor behind an action and usually involves food or other items essential to an organism's survival. Constraints refer to the limitations placed on behavior, such as time and energy used to conduct that behavior, or possibly limitations inherent to their sensory abilities.

Optimality models are used to predict optimal behavior (ex. time spent foraging). To make predictions about optimal behavior, cost-benefit graphs are used to visualize the optimality model (see Fig 1). Optimality occurs at the point in which the difference between benefits and costs for obtaining a currency via a particular behavior is maximized.

Construction

To construct an optimality model, the behavior must first be clearly defined. Then, descriptions of how the costs and benefits vary with the way the behavior is performed must be obtained. [1] Examples of benefits and costs include direct fitness measures like offspring produced, change in lifespan, time spent or gained, or energy spent and gained.

Each time an organism displays a certain behavior, it must weigh the costs and benefits to make a decision. For example, given X amount of time traveling, after catching one bug, would it be better for a bird to continue foraging or to quickly return to its nest to feed chicks? [3] Better understanding of the relationships between the values in a model leads to better predictions of organism behavior.

To determine the optimum time spent on a behavior, one can make a graph showing how benefits and costs change with behavior. Optimality is defined as the point where the difference between benefits and costs for a behavior is maximized, which can be done by graphing the benefits and costs on the y-axis and a measure of the behavior on the x-axis.

Benefits ( B {\displaystyle B} ) and costs ( C {\displaystyle C} ) plotted versus a measure of the behavior. Optimality occurs where the difference B - C {\displaystyle B-C} for a behavior is maximized. Retinagraphillustration.jpg
Benefits () and costs () plotted versus a measure of the behavior. Optimality occurs where the difference for a behavior is maximized.

A currency must also be identified. A test of the predictions generated by the optimality model can be performed to determine which currency the organism maximizes at any given time. For example, when constructing an optimality model for bee foraging time, researchers looked at whether energetic efficiency (energy gained/energy spent) or net rate of gain ((energy gained − energy spent)/time) was optimized. It was found that the bees maximized energetic efficiency when foraging for nectar. [4]

Examples

Cellular sensing

Cells exhibit precise behaviors in response to physical cues. [5] This optimality has been modeled by quantifying what information a sensor can learn from its physical surroundings. [6] Over recent decades, experiments observed biophysical optimality in chemosensing, [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] mechanosensing, [12] [13] [14] and light sensing. [6] [15] [16]

Crows and whelks

A crow. Crowstandingstill.jpg
A crow.

On the Pacific coast of Canada, crows forage on whelks, a species of mollusk. To break the shell of the mollusk, the crows fly and drop the whelks on rocks. Reto Zach constructed an optimality model to predict the optimal height at which crows drop the whelks. [17] The benefit in this model is the success rate of cracking the whelk's shell, while the primary cost is the energy spent flying. If the crows did not fly high enough, they would have little success in breaking the whelks' shells. However, the crows could waste valuable energy if they climb too high. In his model, Zach predicted the optimal height for crows to drop the whelks. To do this, Zach calculated the total distance each whelk was dropped before it was successfully broken. Whelks dropped from 3 meters and lower actually had traveled high total distances because they had to be dropped numerous times in order to be broken. On the other hand, whelks dropped from 5 meters and 15 meters were dropped approximately the same number of times to initiate a break; however, the crows would obviously have to climb higher to break a whelk at 15 meters than at 5 meters. Zach predicted 5 meters to be the optimal dropping height. The results indicated that the crows do follow this model, as the average dropping height was 5.2 meters.

Dung flies

Two dung flies. Yellowdungflymatingpic.jpg
Two dung flies.

Dung flies are a polygamous species that mate on cowpats. The copulation behavior of this species can also be modeled using the marginal value theorem. It has been discovered that in cases where two male dung flies copulate with the same female in relatively rapid succession, the second male will fertilize 80% of the eggs, while the first male will only fertilize 20%. This creates a dilemma for male dung flies. The longer they remain with a female after copulation, the better they are able to guard her from copulating with other males, hence increasing the likelihood of passing his genes to her offspring. However, the longer the male remains with an individual female, the smaller chance he has of finding other mates. Geoff Parker predicted that an optimality model comparing these two behaviors would be affected by the travel time between two patches. [18] For example, short distances between cowpats should widen the pool of available mates in a specific geographic location. Parker predicted that under this condition, dung flies would be more likely to leave their current mate sooner to find additional mates. But if cowpats are few and far between, it would benefit a male dung fly to spend more time guarding a mate, ensuring his genes are passed on, because he may have difficulty finding an additional mate. The results from Parker's experiment agree with this model.

Starlings

One common use of the optimality model is in optimal foraging theory. For example, the foraging behavior in starlings can be predicted using an optimality model, specifically a marginal value theorem model. Researchers compared the amount of time a bird forages to the distance the bird travels to the foraging ground. [19] Birds try to maximize the amount of food they take back to their offspring. Starlings mostly feed their offspring leatherjackets [ citation needed ]. As starlings gather more leatherjackets, it becomes increasingly difficult and time-consuming to find subsequent leatherjackets with the additional prey in their mouths. Thus at some point, it benefits them to stop expending extra energy to find additional food and return to their nests instead. A graph of this phenomenon, called a loading curve, compares foraging time to the number of prey captured. Alex Kacelnik predicted that the curve would fluctuate depending on the starling's travel time. He predicted that starlings traveling further would spend more time at the foraging site to achieve optimal foraging behavior. It's important that these starlings spend extra time at the foraging ground because it takes a lot of energy to travel back and forth from its nest. On the other hand, he predicted starlings traveling shorter distances to foraging grounds should spend less time foraging, making more frequent trips in order to optimize their behavior. Since these starlings have a shorter distance to travel, they don't need to put as much energy into searching for leatherjackets because it is easier for them to return to the foraging ground. His results were consistent with his predictions.

Limitations

Some authors have argued that optimality models may be insufficient in explaining an organism's behaviour. [20] [21] The degree of optimization in response to natural selection depends on the rate at which genetic structure changes, the amount of additive variance present at the time of selection, gene flow, rate of environmental change, and random effects such as genetic drift. Thus, discontinuous phenotypes and fluctuations in payoff affect optimality. [22] Strict optima may not be reachable due to genetic and environmental changes. [23] Genetic factors limiting the attainment of optimality include mutations and genetic linkage. Complementary strategies to describing and analyzing organism behaviour include phylogenetic comparative methods and quantitative genetics. [1]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Behavioral ecology</span> Study of the evolutionary basis for animal behavior due to ecological pressures

Behavioral ecology, also spelled behavioural ecology, is the study of the evolutionary basis for animal behavior due to ecological pressures. Behavioral ecology emerged from ethology after Niko Tinbergen outlined four questions to address when studying animal behaviors: What are the proximate causes, ontogeny, survival value, and phylogeny of a behavior?

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foraging</span> Searching for wild food resources

Foraging is searching for wild food resources. It affects an animal's fitness because it plays an important role in an animal's ability to survive and reproduce. Foraging theory is a branch of behavioral ecology that studies the foraging behavior of animals in response to the environment where the animal lives.

The marginal value theorem (MVT) is an optimality model that usually describes the behavior of an optimally foraging individual in a system where resources are located in discrete patches separated by areas with no resources. Due to the resource-free space, animals must spend time traveling between patches. The MVT can also be applied to other situations in which organisms face diminishing returns.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Optimal foraging theory</span> Behavioral ecology model

Optimal foraging theory (OFT) is a behavioral ecology model that helps predict how an animal behaves when searching for food. Although obtaining food provides the animal with energy, searching for and capturing the food require both energy and time. To maximize fitness, an animal adopts a foraging strategy that provides the most benefit (energy) for the lowest cost, maximizing the net energy gained. OFT helps predict the best strategy that an animal can use to achieve this goal.

Human behavioral ecology (HBE) or human evolutionary ecology applies the principles of evolutionary theory and optimization to the study of human behavioral and cultural diversity. HBE examines the adaptive design of traits, behaviors, and life histories of humans in an ecological context. One aim of modern human behavioral ecology is to determine how ecological and social factors influence and shape behavioral flexibility within and between human populations. Among other things, HBE attempts to explain variation in human behavior as adaptive solutions to the competing life-history demands of growth, development, reproduction, parental care, and mate acquisition. HBE overlaps with evolutionary psychology, human or cultural ecology, and decision theory. It is most prominent in disciplines such as anthropology and psychology where human evolution is considered relevant for a holistic understanding of human behavior.

Life history theory is an analytical framework designed to study the diversity of life history strategies used by different organisms throughout the world, as well as the causes and results of the variation in their life cycles. It is a theory of biological evolution that seeks to explain aspects of organisms' anatomy and behavior by reference to the way that their life histories—including their reproductive development and behaviors, post-reproductive behaviors, and lifespan —have been shaped by natural selection. A life history strategy is the "age- and stage-specific patterns" and timing of events that make up an organism's life, such as birth, weaning, maturation, death, etc. These events, notably juvenile development, age of sexual maturity, first reproduction, number of offspring and level of parental investment, senescence and death, depend on the physical and ecological environment of the organism.

In ecology, an ideal free distribution (IFD) is a theoretical way in which a population's individuals distribute themselves among several patches of resources within their environment, in order to minimize resource competition and maximize fitness. The theory states that the number of individual animals that will aggregate in various patches is proportional to the amount of resources available in each. For example, if patch A contains twice as many resources as patch B, there will be twice as many individuals foraging in patch A as in patch B.

Cooperative breeding is a social system characterized by alloparental care: offspring receive care not only from their parents, but also from additional group members, often called helpers. Cooperative breeding encompasses a wide variety of group structures, from a breeding pair with helpers that are offspring from a previous season, to groups with multiple breeding males and females (polygynandry) and helpers that are the adult offspring of some but not all of the breeders in the group, to groups in which helpers sometimes achieve co-breeding status by producing their own offspring as part of the group's brood. Cooperative breeding occurs across taxonomic groups including birds, mammals, fish, and insects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mate choice</span> One of the primary mechanisms under which evolution can occur

Mate choice is one of the primary mechanisms under which evolution can occur. It is characterized by a "selective response by animals to particular stimuli" which can be observed as behavior. In other words, before an animal engages with a potential mate, they first evaluate various aspects of that mate which are indicative of quality—such as the resources or phenotypes they have—and evaluate whether or not those particular trait(s) are somehow beneficial to them. The evaluation will then incur a response of some sort.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Flock (birds)</span>

A flock is a gathering of individual birds to forage or travel collectively. Avian flocks are typically associated with migration. Flocking also offers foraging benefits and protection from predators, although flocking can have costs for individual members.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sexy son hypothesis</span> Postulate in biology

The sexy son hypothesis in evolutionary biology and sexual selection, proposed by Patrick J. Weatherhead and Raleigh J. Robertson of Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario in 1979, states that a female's ideal mate choice among potential mates is one whose genes will produce males with the best chance of reproductive success. This implies that other benefits the father can offer the mother or offspring are less relevant than they may appear, including his capacity as a parental caregiver, territory and any nuptial gifts. Fisher's principle means that the sex ratio is always near 1:1 between males and females, yet what matters most are her "sexy sons'" future breeding successes, more likely if they have a promiscuous father, in creating large numbers of offspring carrying copies of her genes. This sexual selection hypothesis has been researched in species such as the European pied flycatcher.

Mate desertion occurs when one or both parents abandon their current offspring, and thereby reduce or stop providing parental care. Often, by deserting, a parent attempts to increase breeding opportunities by seeking out another mate. This form of mating strategy behavior is exhibited in insects, birds and mammals. Typically, males are more likely to desert, but both males and females have been observed to practice mate desertion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trap-lining</span> Feeding strategy amongst certain families of birds

In ethology and behavioral ecology, trap-lining or traplining is a feeding strategy in which an individual visits food sources on a regular, repeatable sequence, much as trappers check their lines of traps. Traplining is usually seen in species foraging for floral resources. This involves a specified route in which the individual traverses in the same order repeatedly to check specific plants for flowers that hold nectar, even over long distances. Trap-lining has been described in several taxa, including bees, butterflies, tamarins, bats, rats, and hummingbirds and tropical fruit-eating mammals such as opossums, capuchins and kinkajous. Traplining is used to term the method in which bumblebees and hummingbirds go about collecting nectar, and consequently, pollinating each plant they visit. The term "traplining" was originally coined by Daniel Janzen, although the concept was discussed by Charles Darwin and Nikolaas Tinbergen.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Collective animal behavior</span> Animal cognition

Collective animal behaviour is a form of social behavior involving the coordinated behavior of large groups of similar animals as well as emergent properties of these groups. This can include the costs and benefits of group membership, the transfer of information, decision-making process, locomotion and synchronization of the group. Studying the principles of collective animal behavior has relevance to human engineering problems through the philosophy of biomimetics. For instance, determining the rules by which an individual animal navigates relative to its neighbors in a group can lead to advances in the deployment and control of groups of swimming or flying micro-robots such as UAVs.

The sexual division of labour (SDL) is the delegation of different tasks between males and females. Among human foragers, males and females target different types of foods and share them with each other for a mutual or familial benefit. In some species, males and females eat slightly different foods, while in other species, males and females will routinely share food; but only in humans are these two attributes combined. The few remaining hunter-gatherer populations in the world serve as evolutionary models that can help explain the origin of the sexual division of labor. Many studies on the sexual division of labor have been conducted on hunter-gatherer populations, such as the Hadza, a hunter-gatherer population of Tanzania.

Interlocus sexual conflict is a type of sexual conflict that occurs through the interaction of a set of antagonistic alleles at two or more different loci, or the location of a gene on a chromosome, in males and females, resulting in the deviation of either or both sexes from the fitness optima for the traits. A co-evolutionary arms race is established between the sexes in which either sex evolves a set of antagonistic adaptations that is detrimental to the fitness of the other sex. The potential for reproductive success in one organism is strengthened while the fitness of the opposite sex is weakened. Interlocus sexual conflict can arise due to aspects of male–female interactions such as mating frequency, fertilization, relative parental effort, female remating behavior, and female reproductive rate.

<i>Messor barbarus</i> Species of ant

Messor barbarus is a species of harvester ant in the subfamily Myrmicinae. It is found In Southern Europe and Northern Africa.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Polyandry in nature</span>

In behavioral ecology, polyandry is a class of mating system where one female mates with several males in a breeding season. Polyandry is often compared to the polygyny system based on the cost and benefits incurred by members of each sex. Polygyny is where one male mates with several females in a breeding season . A common example of polyandrous mating can be found in the field cricket of the invertebrate order Orthoptera. Polyandrous behavior is also prominent in many other insect species, including the red flour beetle and the species of spider Stegodyphus lineatus. Polyandry also occurs in some primates such as marmosets, mammal groups, the marsupial genus' Antechinus and bandicoots, around 1% of all bird species, such as jacanas and dunnocks, insects such as honeybees, and fish such as pipefish.

Evolutionary biologists have developed various theoretical models to explain the evolution of food-sharing behavior—"[d]efined as the unresisted transfer of food" from one food-motivated individual to another—among humans and other animals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Avian foraging</span>

Avian foraging refers to the range of activities and behaviours exhibited by birds in their quest for food. In addition to their unique body adaptations, birds have a range of described behaviours that differ from the foraging behaviours of other animal groups. According to the foraging habitat, birds may be grouped into foraging guilds. Foraging includes a range of activities, starting with the search for food, making use of sensory abilities, and which may involve one or more birds either of a single or even of multiple species. This is followed by locomotion and movements to obtain or capture the food, followed by the processing or handling of the foods prior to ingestion. Like all organisms foraging entails balancing the energy spent and energy gained. The high metabolic rate of birds, among the highest in the homoeotherm groups, constrains them to ensure a net positive gain in energy and have led evolutionary ethologists to develop the idea of optimal foraging.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Parker, G. A.; Smith, J. Maynard (November 1990). "Optimality theory in evolutionary biology". Nature. 348 (6296): 27–33. doi:10.1038/348027a0. S2CID   4348920.
  2. ↑ Lucas, Jeffrey R. (August 1983). "The Role of Foraging Time Constraints and Variable Prey Encounter in Optimal Diet Choice". The American Naturalist. 122 (2): 191–209. doi:10.1086/284130. S2CID   85216873.
  3. ↑ Davies, N.; Krebs, J.; West, S. (2012). Introduction to behavioural ecology (4 ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
  4. ↑ Schmid-Hempel, Paul (February 1987). "Efficient Nectar-Collecting by Honeybees I. Economic Models". The Journal of Animal Ecology. 56 (1): 209–218. doi:10.2307/4810. JSTOR   4810.
  5. ↑ Bialek, W. (1987). "Physical limits to sensation and perception". Annual Review of Biophysics and Biophysical Chemistry. 16: 455–478. doi:10.1146/annurev.bb.16.060187.002323. PMID   3297091.
  6. 1 2 Bialek, W. (2012). Biophysics: Searching for Principles. Princeton U. Press.
  7. ↑ Berg, H. C.; Purcell, E. M. (November 1977). "Physics of chemoreception". Biophysical Journal. 20 (2): 193–219. doi:10.1016/s0006-3495(77)85544-6. PMC   1473391 . PMID   911982.
  8. ↑ Petkova, Mariela D.; Tkačik, Gašper; Bialek, William; Wieschaus, Eric F.; Gregor, Thomas (February 2019). "Optimal Decoding of Cellular Identities in a Genetic Network". Cell. 176 (4): 844–855.e15. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.01.007. PMC   6526179 . PMID   30712870.
  9. ↑ Aquino, Gerardo; Wingreen, Ned S.; Endres, Robert G. (March 2016). "Know the Single-Receptor Sensing Limit? Think Again". Journal of Statistical Physics. 162 (5): 1353–1364. doi:10.1007/s10955-015-1412-9. PMC   4761375 . PMID   26941467.
  10. ↑ Mora, Thierry; Wingreen, Ned S. (2010-06-18). "Limits of sensing temporal concentration changes by single cells". Physical Review Letters. 104 (24): 248101. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.248101 . PMID   20867338. S2CID   10526866.
  11. ↑ Endres, Robert G.; Wingreen, Ned S. (2008-10-14). "Accuracy of direct gradient sensing by single cells". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105 (41): 15749–15754. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0804688105 . PMC   2572938 . PMID   18843108.
  12. ↑ Skedung, Lisa; Arvidsson, Martin; Chung, Jun Young; Stafford, Christopher M.; Berglund, Birgitta; Rutland, Mark W. (2013-09-12). "Feeling Small: Exploring the Tactile Perception Limits". Scientific Reports. 3 (1): 2617. doi:10.1038/srep02617. PMC   3771396 . PMID   24030568.
  13. ↑ Beroz, Farzan; Jawerth, Louise M.; Münster, Stefan; Weitz, David A.; Broedersz, Chase P.; Wingreen, Ned S. (2017-07-18). "Physical limits to biomechanical sensing in disordered fibre networks". Nature Communications. 8 (1): 16096. doi:10.1038/ncomms16096. PMC   5520107 . PMID   28719577.
  14. ↑ Beroz, Farzan; Zhou, Di; Mao, Xiaoming; Lubensky, David K. (2020-10-14). "Physical limits to sensing material properties". Nature Communications. 11 (1): 5170. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18995-4. PMC   7560877 . PMID   33056989.
  15. ↑ Dowling, J. E. (1987). The Retina: An Approachable Part of the Brain. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  16. ↑ Optimal filtering in the salamander retina. F Rieke, WG Owen & W Bialek, in Advances in Neural Information Processing 3, R Lippman, J Moody & D Touretzky, eds, pp 377–383 (Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo CA, 1991).
  17. ↑ Zach, Reto (1978). "Selection and Dropping of Whelks By Northwestern Crows". Behaviour. 67 (1–2): 134–147. doi:10.1163/156853978x00297.
  18. ↑ Parker, Geoffrey A.; Simmons, Leigh W.; Stockley, Paula; McChristie, Doreen M.; Charnov, Eric L. (April 1999). "Optimal copula duration in yellow dung flies: effects of female size and egg content". Animal Behaviour. 57 (4): 795–805. doi:10.1006/anbe.1998.1034. PMID   10202088. S2CID   23642915.
  19. ↑ Bautista, Luis M.; Tinbergen, Joost; Wiersma, Popko; Kacelnik, Alex (October 1998). "Optimal Foraging and Beyond: How Starlings Cope with Changes in Food Availability" (PDF). The American Naturalist. 152 (4): 543–561. doi:10.1086/286189. PMID   18811363. S2CID   12049476.
  20. ↑ Davies, N., Krebs, J., & West, S. (2012). Introduction to Behavioural Ecology. (4 ed.). (pp. 432-433). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
  21. ↑ Orzack, S. H., & Sober, E. (2001). Adaptationism and optimality. (1 ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  22. ↑ Frank, S. A. (1998). Foundations of social evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 4 Prestwich, K. (2007). Notes on optimality theory. Retrieved from http://college.holycross.edu/faculty/kprestwi/behavior/e&be_notes/e&be_07_Optimality.pdf
  23. ↑ Prestwich, K. (2007). Notes on optimality theory. Retrieved from http://college.holycross.edu/faculty/kprestwi/behavior/e&be_notes/e&be_07_Optimality.pdf
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.