Animal behaviour|Crap|Disgust
Crappy food is still food
Do animals also use the 5-second rule?
I was routinely making coffee this morning before going to work. I take two scoops of my favorite Indonesian dark roast beans and manually grind them. The grinder is made in Taiwan and was bought in Taipei, and I cherish it like one of my limbs.
I love its old-fashioned smoked-wood design with its sturdy brass swivel handle at the top. The resulting coffee grinds get deposited into the bottom container that could be easily twisted and serve as a coffee mug if I wanted it, too, though I’m sure that wasn’t the intention.
Unlike the one I owned previously, this grinder is enclosed and keeps the grinds from escaping and scattering everywhere. At the top, it has a small opening with a sliding hatch into which the beans go. If I’m not careful, an occasional stray bean misses the hole and falls to the floor.
The bean is now on the floor.
What do you think I’ll do next?
A. Pick it up and put it back into the grinder after I blow on it. The five-second rule, right?
B. Pick it up and put it back into the grinder without care.
C. Put it into the waste basket.
D. Plant it in the ground, hoping it grows like Jack’s beanstalk.
The answer is A.
But what if the floor were wet or sticky? What would you do?
Would you leave it or salvage it?
What if it dropped onto poop? Need I ask?
Throw away or take away?
That is one of several questions Kyoto University researchers have been investigating in over 30 different animal species. Among the additional animals the team is examining are Japanese macaques, lorises, and red-eye slider turtles.
What are the strategic behavioral mechanics involved in animals avoiding illness?
A team of researchers at the University’s Center for International Collaboration and Advanced Studies in Primatology (CICASP) — previously the Primate Research Institute — in Aichi Prefecture, Japan, are looking at disgust as an emotional response to the literally shitty matter as a preventive and protective measure.
In their experimental hypotheses, social and environmental factors are taken into account. For example, macaques are highly competitive among their hierarchical groups and appear to only fend for themselves. And when I visited the Center last year, I observed some individuals getting visibly feisty and upset with others over the food.
“Don’t touch my grub, bro.”
So, a mother macaque, whose primary role is to feed and protect her young offspring, may come across a potential food source, such as a piece of dried fruit or a cracker placed on the ground by a researcher. Except…it’s sitting on top of what appears as a dried-up piece of manure. (I forgot to ask the identity of the pooper — probably macaque manure.)
What do you suppose Mama Macaca will do next?
A. Reject it
B. Carefully pick up the food
C. Smack the shit away
D. Submit a formal complaint to the researchers
Answer: C
The mother’s accurate aim was impressive, sending the fake fecal model fabricated with a 3D printer tumbling yards away. Interestingly, she took the food to a puddle of water and washed it before giving it a taste test and sharing it with her infant.
Disgust, therefore, does not necessarily presume automatic rejection but may entail a set of behaviors indicating awareness of health risks and careful evaluation of a given set of crappy circumstances.
That’s not bullshit.
Thanks for reading!
