ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS ARE MEDIATED AND PRECEDED BY SOCIAL AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
Friedmann V., Suslov V.
RJEE Vol. 11 (2). 2026 | DOI: 10.21685/2500-0578-2026-2-2
Abstract | PDF (Rus) | Additional files
Receipt date 21.03.2026 | Publication date 26.06.2026
ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS ARE MEDIATED AND PRECEDED BY SOCIAL AND PUBLIC INFORMATION
V.S. Fridman1, V.V. Suslov2
1 Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia
2 Institute of Cytology and Genetics of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, Russia
1 wolfkitses3@yandex.ru, 2 valya@bio.nsc.ru
Abstract. A review of data shows that the action of environmental factors (determining competition between species, predator-prey relationships, choice of habitats, nesting sites, shelters, microstations, feeding methods, etc.) is invariably preceded by information, so that the response to them is proactive rather than reactive. Animals assess the risk of predator attack, the availability of food in different habitats, the abundance or, conversely, the scarcity of shelters, feeding sites, nesting sites, roosting sites, and other significant centres of activity not through direct stimulation by instances of hunting, successful or unsuccessful feeding in different stations, etc., i.e., not by the direct action of environmental factors, but indirectly, by precursor signals. Thanks to these signals, animals assess the level of risk or, conversely, the favourability of a biotope in advance: a map of its subjective quality is created, showing the anisotropy of the habitat “from the point of view of a given species and individual”. Guided by this map, animals develop their life activities in a given territory, including new and/or unfamiliar habitats. Orientation by such signals allows them, even in these conditions, to quickly and purposefully find the best micro-stations without extremely dangerous blind searching (and without any traces of searching at all), to successfully feed and reproduce there. Any component of the animal’s external environment can become a precursor signal: the directly visible and countable abundance of food; – individuals of their own or closely related species, as well as predators, competitors or mutualists, as well as their droppings, nests, burrows, hollows, scratches, gnaw marks, cones or nuts in woodpecker ‘forges’, etc., traces of life activity. Secondary signals of the presence or activity of these species in these habitats are perceived as the attractiveness and/or danger of the latter; – typical activity of individuals in typical situations of interaction (mating, nest building, egg laying, contact or ‘hunting’ calls, urine, faeces or other marks associated with this activity), i.e. any characteristic change in the habitat that allows one to recognise ‘who did it’ and ‘for what purpose/what they were doing here’. What does this mean? An ordinary thing involved in an individual’s activity, both in self-sufficiency and especially in interaction with social companions, can be perceived not as a thing, but as a sign, signal or symbol to the extent of the typicality of its execution (= the distinctiveness of the image and recognisability in perception). Like any sign, it informs about the situation, controls behaviour, ‘making’ this particular part of the external world of the individual a symbol. Animals (like humans) transform various objects of the external world from things into signs that control their activity in the external world and their psychophysiological state in the internal world. This includes, most remarkably, the use of neutral symbols, such as circles with triangles, by flycatchers, which mark significant objects (titmouse nests, observation of which allows one to determine the ‘quality’ of a given nesting site) are marked by the experimenter. Moreover, in assessing the quality of their habitat and choosing their own nesting sites, flycatchers prefer to be guided by such symbols rather than directly by the success of reproduction in the corresponding titmouse nests. The latter is important because until recently it was thought that this was characteristic only of intelligent humans: humanities scholars (alas!) still believe this to be the case.
Keywords: ethology, social information, biological signaling field, urbanized populations, animal communication, animal signals, animal intelligence, microevolution, landscape of fear, alternative strategies
Acknowledgments: V.S. Fridman is grateful to his scientific supervisor, G. N. Simkin, from whom he adopted the idea of the signal function of habitat “architecture” elements in the 1980s a concept considered heretical at the time. The authors thank the anonymous reviewer for valuable suggestions on improving the manuscript.
Financing: the study was carried out within the framework of the state assignment of Lomonosov Moscow State University and was partially supported by FWNR-2022-0020.
For citation: Fridman V.S., Suslov V.V. Ecological impacts are mediated and preceded by social and public information. Russian Journal of Ecosystem Ecology. 2026;11(2). (In Russ.). Available from: https://doi.org/ 10.21685/2500-0578-2026-2-2