Reciprocal cooperation between unrelated rats depends on cost to donor and benefit to recipient

Background Although evolutionary models of cooperation build on the intuition that costs of the donor and benefits to the receiver are the most general fundamental parameters, it is largely unknown how they affect the decision of animals to cooperate with an unrelated social partner. Here we test experimentally whether costs to the donor and need of the receiver decide about the amount of help provided by unrelated rats in an iterated prisoner's dilemma game. Results Fourteen unrelated Norway rats were alternately presented to a cooperative or defective partner for whom they could provide food via a mechanical apparatus. Direct costs for this task and the need of the receiver were manipulated in two separate experiments. Rats provided more food to cooperative partners than to defectors (direct reciprocity). The propensity to discriminate between helpful and non-helpful social partners was contingent on costs: An experimentally increased resistance in one Newton steps to pull food for the social partner reduced the help provided to defectors more strongly than the help returned to cooperators. Furthermore, test rats provided more help to hungry receivers that were light or in poor condition, which might suggest empathy, whereas this relationship was inverse when experimental partners were satiated. Conclusions In a prisoner's dilemma situation rats seem to take effect of own costs and potential benefits to a receiver when deciding about helping a social partner, which confirms the predictions of reciprocal cooperation. Thus, factors that had been believed to be largely confined to human social behaviour apparently influence the behaviour of other social animals as well, despite widespread scepticism. Therefore our results shed new light on the biological basis of reciprocity.

Cooperation between expert knowledge and data mining discovered knowledge: Lessons learned

Expert systems are built from knowledge traditionally elicited from the human expert. It is precisely knowledge elicitation from the expert that is the bottleneck in expert system construction. On the other hand, a data mining system, which automatically extracts knowledge, needs expert guidance on the successive decisions to be made in each of the system phases. In this context, expert knowledge and data mining discovered knowledge can cooperate, maximizing their individual capabilities: data mining discovered knowledge can be used as a complementary source of knowledge for the expert system, whereas expert knowledge can be used to guide the data mining process. This article summarizes different examples of systems where there is cooperation between expert knowledge and data mining discovered knowledge and reports our experience of such cooperation gathered from a medical diagnosis project called Intelligent Interpretation of Isokinetics Data, which we developed. From that experience, a series of lessons were learned throughout project development. Some of these lessons are generally applicable and others pertain exclusively to certain project types.

Cooperation between the activin and Wnt pathways in the spatial control of organizer gene expression

The normal expression pattern of the Wnt responsive homeobox gene Siamois is restricted to the dorso-vegetal region of the Xenopus embryo. Because the Wnt signaling pathway (via β-catenin) is active on the entire dorsal side of the early embryo, we have asked why Siamois expression is not seen in the dorsal ectoderm. Only Wnt signaling, via activation of β-catenin, can induce directly Siamois, and signaling via the SMAD1 (BMP2/4) or SMAD2 (activin/Vg-1) pathways cannot. We now directly show that the SMAD2 pathway can cooperate with the Wnt pathway to induce expression of Siamois much more strongly than the Wnt pathway alone, in normal embryos. We demonstrate the significance of this cooperation in normal embryos by blocking the SMAD2 signaling pathway with a dominant negative activin receptor. The activin dominant negative receptor blocks this cooperative effect and reduces the expression of Siamois by threefold in early embryos. Furthermore, we find that this cooperative relationship between the SMAD2 and Wnt pathways is reciprocal. Thus, in normal embryos, the Wnt pathway can enhance induction, by the SMAD 2 pathway, of the organizer genes Gsc and Chd but not the pan-mesodermal marker genes Xbra and Eomes. We conclude that the Wnt and SMAD2 signaling pathways cooperate to induce the expression of Spemann-organizer specific genes and so help to localize their spatial expression.