Are mantis shrimp the most intelligent invertebrates?

[Pandora]

Of COURSE sociality has a bearing on intelligence, silly... ROFL...
I wouldn't have spent so much of my life studying sociobiology if I didn't think so. But seeing it as the only reason why intelligence would evolve is very closed-minded. I'm offering an alternate theory on why it would evolve, since you asked earlier "how could an asocial, nonparental care organism ever evolve intelligence". And yes, this applies both for mantis and octopi. And once it evolved, if there were no selective pressures against it and only pressures for it, then there would be no need to "explain away" being or not being social.

And on the dogs and sensory interpretation... the example you gave is not what is sensory interpretation is... (I think you have a tendency to define terms with specific biological meaning however you like)... what you're talking about is a secondary, higher cortex function of extrapolation and reasoning BASED on primary cues of sensory interpretation,. Again, these words all have specific meaning in biology and can't be thrown around lightly. On comparison with dogs... I don't know the last time you were able to smell and interpret pheromones, and figure out who they came from, if you've met them before, how old they were and if they were sexually receptive with one sniff. If you could, I think some perfume companies would have a job for you

 

[kalim]

oh, yeah, i like creating my own scientific terms...used to be a biologist (albeit on the molecular side of things), but that was WAY too long ago and now i decided i'll just make the words up that i can't remember

...I noticed we're actually going around each other though, terms or no terms.

let's make it simpler:

1. we agree that intelligence is an amorphous, broad term that is very hard to measure accurately, if at all.

2. we agree mantis shrimps are social animals (at least in some cases) with well-developed parental care (at least compared to octos), behavior and learning abilities that equals if not surpasses those in octopus (at least according to Dr Caldwell, who studies both), highly developed ability to distinguish between individuals, are relatively long -lived, and have the capacity to develop monogamous long-term relationships. Octopuses, on the other hand, are asocial short lived species that seem to demonstrate some capacity for observational learning (although this is highly debated even at this time). They also demonstrate a great capability of escaping from tanks.

3. we agree intelligence cannot be automatically assumed based on such characteristics as monogamy, parental care, etc.

4. we agree that there are several possible causes for the evolution of intelligence. Two you mentioned: prey/predator selection pressure, and sociality. We agree that both mantis shrimps and octopuises are subject to the first, but that mantis shrimps are alone subject to the second.

What I think:

5. I do not believe ascribing so easily the broad term intelligence to mantis shrimps OR octopuses is helpful or even desirable. I believe some researchers get too attached to their subjects and start out by reaching the conclusion of intelligence then trying to prove it.

6. I find anecdotes about octopuses escaping from tanks and opening jar lids to be interesting stories, but indicative of nothing else. These are probably emergent properties/characteristics that derive from behavior that the octopuses have evolved in their natural habitat., with no higher cognitive forces at work.


hmmm...hope that cools the fervor....peace.

 

[Pandora]

Well with those sentiments, I can mostly agree! There are some minor points in the above that I wouldn't go with, but I don't think they're worthwhile splitting hairs over... and the last point is more one of personal opinion which neither of us is really going to have our minds changed over... unless you'd like to come over and see my octopus open completely novel things that he has never seen and would never have had the opportunity to experience anything remotely like in the wild

But for the most part, yup, I think we actually see many of the same points, but we've debated over terminology and what things we emphasize. Intelligence IS a broad term, but I don't have the same reservation with using it, even on invertebrates, so long as we stay consistent and precise in our definitions of it... otherwise, again, it's a human pitfall.

But as far as fervor hehe... I rather enjoyed the chat, and want to thank you for it... after all, it was a pretty civil debate that got heated, but aside from a little ribbing and sarcasm, I don't think it was anything too bad. As you can see, it's a subject I'm rather passionate about... I think sometimes the things that aren't cut-and-dry or easily provable... the so-called "soft sciences"... are the most interesting at all.

 

[akarias]

Well, though I personally thought octopus were more intelligent, probably from all the books saying they're the smartest invertebrates or whatever from being able to solve mazes, etc.., I'm not really sure if those are accurate things to judge intelligence with.

I mean, for instance in these anecdotal evidence of octopus being able to do all these things to find food, I personally find the way mantis shrimp learn to kill new types of pray equally intelligent (for instance, I know of mantis who learn to just blast the crab's shell as opposed to tearing off their limbs, a clearly progressive change in behavior, since it's much faster), just through a different venue. Octopuses may be better at solving mazes because they have to squeeze through difficult crevasses, while mantis shrimp learn how to defeat difficult prey because that is part of their more diverse predatorial nature.


Personally, I find Gonodactylus's argument on an evolutionary standpoint very compelling, particularly the ones about lifespan and social behavior. Life span imho is a critical factor in evolving higher intelligence since in that case genes and instincts alone cannot allow the species to survive through its long and varied life. Social behavior is a bit more muddier water, admittedly, since ants are extremely social creatures, and birds mate for life for evolutionary purposes, though neither are particularly intelligent (birds at least for the most part).

Mantis shrimp exhibit this type of "experience" in the way they behave toward other animals, in not having pre-programmed responses to each new threat/prey. Against both threats (larger octopus) and tougher prey (large crabs) mantis shrimp do not have pre-programmed responses as do most other invertebrates, most octopus included. Mantis will dive in and out to test their prey's ability to fight back, and increase their attacking efficiency upon further attempt. That sounds pretty smart to me.

Admittedly experimentally it's hard to come up with a solid comparison. It's like comparing a dolphin and a tiger, since they have such drastically different morphologies (1000x moreso for octopus vs. mantis shrimp)

 

[AJSTITAN14]

I had replied and then I saw the thread is from 2002. I blame Akarias.

 

[Lewis Smart]

I'm not exactly qualified to judge, but in my opinion, for their size mantis shrimp seem incredibly intelligent. It's like that thing about ants being able to carry 50 times their own body weight, or that the jump of a flea is the equivilent of a human leaping over the eiffel tower. My mantis is only about an inch long, it's head is puny.. yet it recognises me. It's behaviour seems about as complex and coordinated as a reptile, for example, certainly leagues above most insects, fish and crustaceans that I've known.
The way they move around makes them seem highly intelligent compared to shrimp, crabs, etc.. But the fluidity and grace of their movement might just add to an illusion of intelligence. They may just be a very specialised organism with all of their 'intelligence' focused on a few particular areas related to sight, movement and hunting. Mine doesn't seem to spend much time contemplating anything, it rarely sits still.. when there's nothing else to do it just punches walls.