4.6 Article

Covariations between personality behaviors and metabolic/performance traits in an Asian agamid lizard (Phrynocephalus vlangalii)

期刊

PEERJ
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PEERJ INC
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7205

关键词

Metabolic capacity; Performance; Phrynocephalus vlangalii; Coadaptation; Personality traits

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31370431, 31572273, 31272304]
  2. Sichuan Provincial Science and Technology Department [2018JY0617]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ecological factors related to predation risks and foraging play major roles in determining which behavioral traits may mediate life history trade-offs and, therefore, the pace-of-life syndrome (POLS) structure among behavioral, physiological, and life-history traits. It has been proposed that activity/exploration or risk-taking behaviors are more likely to impact resource acquisition for organisms (individuals, populations, and species) foraging on clumped and ephemeral food sources than for organisms foraging on abundant and evenly distributed resources. In contrast, vigilance or freezing behavior would be expected to covary with the pace of life when organisms rely on food items requiring long bouts of handling. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how general this pattern is. We tested this hypothesis by examining the associations between exploration/risk-taking behaviors and metabolic/performance traits for the viviparous agamid lizard, Phrynocephalus vlangalii. This species forages on sparse and patchy food sources. The results showed positive correlations between exploration and endurance capacity, and between bite force and risk-taking willingness. Our current findings, in conjunction with our previous work showed no correlations between freezing behavior and performance in this species, support the idea that behaviors in life-history trade-offs are natural history-dependent in P. vlangalii, and provide evidence that behavioral types play functional roles in life history trade-offs to supporting POLS hypothesis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据