4.0 Article

Behavioural repeatability in larval Limnephilus lunatus Curtis, 1834 (Trichoptera) in an open-field test

Journal

AQUATIC INSECTS
Volume 42, Issue 1, Pages 62-77

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/01650424.2020.1865545

Keywords

Animal behaviour; Limnephilidae; intra-individual differences; open-field test; Trichoptera

Categories

Funding

  1. MEYS CZ grant [LM2015075]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found inter-individual repeatability in distance moved in an open-field test for larval Limnephilus lunatus, comparable to previous studies on arthropod species, suggesting it is a suitable model species. The study also identified two potential nuisance factors affecting activity and recommended excluding data from initial trials for higher repeatability in future studies.
This article investigates inter-individual repeatability in distance moved in an open-field test for larval Limnephilus lunatus Curtis, 1834. Repeatability across four trials (two-day trial intervals) was comparable to previous studies on arthropod species (repeatability: R = 0.37), indicating that L. lunatus is a suitable model species in this research field. Two potential nuisance factors were corrected for: (1) progressively declining activity over consecutive trials and (2) case mass:body mass ratio, affecting activity negatively. These factors require consideration in behavioural experiments on larval caddisflies. Pairwise correlations of distance moved among trial days showed that behaviour in the first trial did not correspond well with behaviour in the following trials. Re-analysing the data using only trials 2 to 4 increased the repeatability (repeatability: R = 0.50), suggesting that future studies should consider not including data derived from initial trials, as the initial trial may constitute a different context than the following ones.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available