title: Weber's law, the magnitude effect and discrimination of sugar concentrations in nectar-feeding animals.
abstract: Weber's law quantifies the perception of difference between stimuli. For instance, it can explain why we are less likely to detect the removal of three nuts from a bowl if the bowl is full than if it is nearly empty. This is an example of the magnitude effect - the phenomenon that the subjective perception of a linear difference between a pair of stimuli progressively diminishes when the average magnitude of the stimuli increases. Although discrimination performances of both human and animal subjects in various sensory modalities exhibit the magnitude effect, results sometimes systematically deviate from the quantitative predictions based on Weber's law. An attempt to reformulate the law to better fit data from acoustic discrimination tasks has been dubbed the "near-miss to Weber's law". Here, we tested the gustatory discrimination performance of nectar-feeding bats (Glossophaga soricina), in order to investigate whether the original version of Weber's law accurately predicts choice behavior in a two-alternative forced choice task. As expected, bats either preferred the sweeter of the two options or showed no preference. In 4 out of 6 bats the near-miss to Weber's law provided a better fit and Weber's law underestimated the magnitude effect. In order to test the generality of this observation in nectar-feeders, we reviewed previously published data on bats, hummingbirds, honeybees, and bumblebees. In all groups of animals the near-miss to Weber's law provided better fits than Weber's law. Furthermore, whereas the magnitude effect was stronger than predicted by Weber's law in vertebrates, it was weaker than predicted in insects. Thus nectar-feeding vertebrates and insects seem to differ in how their choice behavior changes as sugar concentration is increased. We discuss the ecological and evolutionary implications of the observed patterns of sugar concentration discrimination.
authors.affiliation: Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
authors.forename: Vladislav
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Nachev
authors.forename: Kai Petra
authors.initials: KP
authors.lastname: Stich
authors.forename: York
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Winter
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001516:Bees; D001717:Birds; D002685:Chiroptera; D002755:Choice Behavior; D005260:Female; D060434:Herbivory; D008297:Male; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D057048:Plant Nectar; D011594:Psychometrics
chemical_list: D057048:Plant Nectar
references.citation: J Vis. 2005 May 27;5(5):478-92
references.pmid: 16097878
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2003 Apr;110(2):365-75
references.pmid: 12747528
references.citation: Cell. 2009 Oct 16;139(2):416-27
references.pmid: 19837040
references.citation: Oecologia. 1976 Jun;25(2):101-113
references.pmid: 28308993
references.citation: Oecologia. 1986 May;69(2):309-315
references.pmid: 28311376
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Oct 4;108(40):16618-21
references.pmid: 21949358
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2001 Nov;63(8):1293-313
references.pmid: 11800458
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2001 Nov;63(8):1348-55
references.pmid: 11800461
references.citation: Science. 2006 Oct 27;314(5799):614
references.pmid: 17068254
references.citation: Nature. 2008 Jun 12;453(7197):917-20
references.pmid: 18548069
references.citation: Comp Biochem Physiol A Comp Physiol. 1972 Jun 1;42(2):359-66
references.pmid: 4404370
references.citation: PLoS One. 2013 Sep 10;8(9):e74144
references.pmid: 24040189
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1984 Mar;35(3):269-78
references.pmid: 6728626
references.citation: Oecologia. 1984 Aug;63(2):178-184
references.pmid: 28311011
references.citation: Science. 1961 Jan 13;133(3446):80-6
references.pmid: 17769332
references.citation: Oecologia. 1979 Aug;41(3):301-304
references.pmid: 28309767
references.citation: Anim Cogn. 2012 May;15(3):393-400
references.pmid: 22045545
references.citation: Anim Cogn. 2013 May;16(3):417-27
references.pmid: 23179111
references.citation: J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. 2007 Feb;193(2):265-9
references.pmid: 17106703
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1999 Jan;61(1):87-106
references.pmid: 10070202
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 1998 Sep 21;194(2):289-98
references.pmid: 9778440
references.citation: New Phytol. 2010 Oct;188(2):354-63
references.pmid: 20497346
references.citation: J Vis. 2011 May 23;11(6):
references.pmid: 21606382
references.citation: J Theor Biol. 2008 Feb 7;250(3):410-23
references.pmid: 18022645
references.citation: Ann Bot. 2009 Nov;104(6):1017-43
references.pmid: 19789175
references.citation: J Exp Biol. 2005 Feb;208(Pt 3):539-48
references.pmid: 15671342