5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Self-regulation and the foraging gene (PRKG1) in humans

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Foraging is a goal-directed behavior that balances the need to explore the environment for resources with the need to exploit those resources. In Drosophila melanogaster, distinct phenotypes have been observed in relation to the foraging gene ( for), labeled the rover and sitter. Adult rovers explore their environs more extensively than do adult sitters. We explored whether this distinction would be conserved in humans. We made use of a distinction from regulatory mode theory between those who “get on with it,” so-called locomotors, and those who prefer to ensure they “do the right thing,” so-called assessors. In this logic, rovers and locomotors share similarities in goal pursuit, as do sitters and assessors. We showed that genetic variation in PRKG1, the human ortholog of for, is associated with preferential adoption of a specific regulatory mode. Next, participants performed a foraging task to see whether genetic differences associated with distinct regulatory modes would be associated with distinct goal pursuit patterns. Assessors tended to hug the boundary of the foraging environment, much like behaviors seen in Drosophila adult sitters. In a patchy foraging environment, assessors adopted more cautious search strategies maximizing exploitation. These results show that distinct patterns of goal pursuit are associated with particular genotypes of PRKG1, the human ortholog of for.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.

          Deciding advantageously in a complex situation is thought to require overt reasoning on declarative knowledge, namely, on facts pertaining to premises, options for action, and outcomes of actions that embody the pertinent previous experience. An alternative possibility was investigated: that overt reasoning is preceded by a nonconscious biasing step that uses neural systems other than those that support declarative knowledge. Normal participants and patients with prefrontal damage and decision-making defects performed a gambling task in which behavioral, psychophysiological, and self-account measures were obtained in parallel. Normals began to choose advantageously before they realized which strategy worked best, whereas prefrontal patients continued to choose disadvantageously even after they knew the correct strategy. Moreover, normals began to generate anticipatory skin conductance responses (SCRs) whenever they pondered a choice that turned out to be risky, before they knew explicitly that it was a risky choice, whereas patients never developed anticipatory SCRs, although some eventually realized which choices were risky. The results suggest that, in normal individuals, nonconscious biases guide behavior before conscious knowledge does. Without the help of such biases, overt knowledge may be insufficient to ensure advantageous behavior.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Influence of gene action across different time scales on behavior.

            Genes can affect natural behavioral variation in different ways. Allelic variation causes alternative behavioral phenotypes, whereas changes in gene expression can influence the initiation of behavior at different ages. We show that the age-related transition by honey bees from hive work to foraging is associated with an increase in the expression of the foraging (for) gene, which encodes a guanosine 3',5'-monophosphate (cGMP)-dependent protein kinase (PKG). cGMP treatment elevated PKG activity and caused foraging behavior. Previous research showed that allelic differences in PKG expression result in two Drosophila foraging variants. The same gene can thus exert different types of influence on a behavior.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              To "do the right thing" or to "just do it": locomotion and assessment as distinct self-regulatory imperatives.

              An integrated series of studies investigated 2 functional dimensions of self-regulation referred to as assessment and locomotion (E. T. Higgins and A. W. Kruglanski, 1995). Assessment constitutes the comparative aspect of self-regulation that critically evaluates alternative goals or means to decide which are best to pursue and appraises performance. Locomotion constitutes the aspect of self-regulation concerned with movement from state to state, including commitment of psychological resources to initiate and maintain such movement. Two separate scales were developed to measure individual differences in these tendencies. Psychometric work attested to the scales' unidimensionality, internal consistency, and temporal stability. The authors found that (a) locomotion and assessment are relatively independent of each other, (b) both are needed for self-regulatory success, and (c) each relates to distinct task orientations and motivational emphases.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
                Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
                Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
                0027-8424
                1091-6490
                February 19 2019
                : 201809924
                Article
                10.1073/pnas.1809924116
                6410783
                30782798
                ad92fec5-08b1-4c48-affa-abb594ef25be
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article