» Articles » PMID: 18474860

Quorum Decision-making Facilitates Information Transfer in Fish Shoals

Overview
Specialty Science
Date 2008 May 14
PMID 18474860
Citations 139
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Despite the growing interest in collective phenomena such as "swarm intelligence" and "wisdom of the crowds," little is known about the mechanisms underlying decision-making in vertebrate animal groups. How do animals use the behavior of others to make more accurate decisions, especially when it is not possible to identify which individuals possess pertinent information? One plausible answer is that individuals respond only when they see a threshold number of individuals perform a particular behavior. Here, we investigate the role of such "quorum responses" in the movement decisions of fish (three-spine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus). We show that a quorum response to conspecifics can explain how sticklebacks make collective movement decisions, both in the absence and presence of a potential predation risk. Importantly our experimental work shows that a quorum response can reduce the likelihood of amplification of nonadaptive following behavior. Whereas the traveling direction of solitary fish was strongly influenced by a single replica conspecific, the replica was largely ignored by larger groups of four or eight sticklebacks under risk, and the addition of a second replica was required to exert influence on the movement decisions of such groups. Model simulations further predict that quorum responses by fish improve the accuracy and speed of their decision-making over that of independent decision-makers or those using a weak linear response. This study shows that effective and accurate information transfer in groups may be gained only through nonlinear responses of group members to each other, thus highlighting the importance of quorum decision-making.

Citing Articles

Survival Strategies and Color Preferences of Mandarin Fish () and Mud Carp (): Implications for Aquaculture.

Xiang M, Wei N, Liu H, Liao M, Meng Z, Li X Animals (Basel). 2025; 15(4).

PMID: 40003038 PMC: 11851689. DOI: 10.3390/ani15040557.


Sexually differentiated decision-making involves faster recruitment in the early stages for the Tibetan antelopes .

Zhu Q, Guan J, Lei T, Xuan K, Guo S, Zhao Y Curr Zool. 2025; 71(1):124-135.

PMID: 39996253 PMC: 11847017. DOI: 10.1093/cz/zoae036.


Probing Asymmetric Interactions with Time-Separated Mutual Information: A Case Study Using Golden Shiners.

Daftari K, Mayo M, Lemasson B, Biedenbach J, Pilkiewicz K Entropy (Basel). 2024; 26(9).

PMID: 39330108 PMC: 11431621. DOI: 10.3390/e26090775.


Leaderless consensus decision-making determines cooperative transport direction in weaver ants.

Carlesso D, Stewardson M, McLean D, Mazue G, Garnier S, Feinerman O Proc Biol Sci. 2024; 291(2028):20232367.

PMID: 39140325 PMC: 11323088. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2023.2367.


Collective intelligence: A unifying concept for integrating biology across scales and substrates.

McMillen P, Levin M Commun Biol. 2024; 7(1):378.

PMID: 38548821 PMC: 10978875. DOI: 10.1038/s42003-024-06037-4.


References
1.
Franks N, Dornhaus A, Fitzsimmons J, Stevens M . Speed versus accuracy in collective decision making. Proc Biol Sci. 2003; 270(1532):2457-63. PMC: 1691524. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2003.2527. View

2.
Conradt L, Roper T . Consensus decision making in animals. Trends Ecol Evol. 2006; 20(8):449-56. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2005.05.008. View

3.
Bonabeau E, Theraulaz G, Deneubourg J, Aron S, Camazine S . Self-organization in social insects. Trends Ecol Evol. 2011; 12(5):188-93. DOI: 10.1016/s0169-5347(97)01048-3. View

4.
Couzin I, Krause J, Franks N, Levin S . Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature. 2005; 433(7025):513-6. DOI: 10.1038/nature03236. View

5.
Danchin E, Giraldeau L, Valone T, H Wagner R . Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science. 2004; 305(5683):487-91. DOI: 10.1126/science.1098254. View