Desde que me conheço que aproveito os Verões para apanhar amoras silvestres. Enquanto morei em Estarreja aproveitava para as apanhar e congelar, para consumo no resto do ano.
Na época alta, enquanto apanhava amoras a partir de uma posição, pensava sempre nos critérios a seguir para passar para a posição seguinte, antes de esgotar as amoras da posição actual. Nunca pensei que isso fosse objecto de estudo cientifico.
"Every creature that forages for food decides at some point that the food source they're working on is no richer than the rest of the patch and that it's time to move on and find something better..BTW, julgo que isto também se aplica a políticos: autarquia/escritório de advocacia, parlamento, governo/administração de empresas...
This kind of foraging decision is a fundamental problem that goes far back in evolutionary history and is dealt with by creatures that don't even have proper brains...
This all fits with a 1976 theory by evolutionary ecologist Eric Charnov, called the Marginal Value Theorem, Platt said. It says that all foragers make calculations of reward and cost that tell them to leave a patch when their intake diminishes to the average intake rate for the overall environment. That is, one doesn't pick a blueberry bush until it's bare, only until it looks about as abundant as the bushes on either side of it. Shorter travel time to the next patch means it costs less to move, and foragers should move more easily. This theorem has been found to hold in organisms as diverse as worms, bees, wasps, spiders, fish, birds, seals and even plants, Platt said.
.
"This is a really fundamental solution to a fundamental problem," Platt said."
Trecho retirado de "Deciding to stay or go is a deep-seated brain function, monkey-watching researchers find"
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário