4.5 Article

Variability in the stereotyped prey capture sequence of male cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis) could relate to personality differences

期刊

ANIMAL COGNITION
卷 21, 期 6, 页码 773-785

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10071-018-1209-8

关键词

Cephalopods; Hunting behaviour; Animal personality; Behavioural consistency; Welfare

资金

  1. H2020-MSCA-IF-2014 (GROUPIND) [659106]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies of animal personality have shown consistent between-individual variation in behaviour in many social and non-social contexts, but hunting behaviour has been overlooked. Prey capture sequences, especially in invertebrates, are supposed to be quite invariant. In cuttlefish, the attack includes three components: attention, positioning, and seizure. The previous studies indicated some variability in these components and we quantified it under the hypothesis that it could relate to personality differences. We, therefore, analysed predation sequences of adult cuttlefish to test their association with personality traits in different contexts. Nineteen subjects were first exposed to an alert and a threat test and then given a live prey, for 10 days. Predation sequences were scored for components of the attack, locomotor and postural elements, body patterns, and number of successful tentacle ejections (i.e. seizure). PCA analysis of predatory patterns identified three dimensions accounting for 53.1%, 15.9%, and 9.6% of the variance and discriminating individuals based on speed in catching prey, duration of attack behaviour, and attention to prey. Predation rate, success rate, and hunting time were significantly correlated with the first, second, and third PCA factors, respectively. Significant correlations between capture patterns and responsiveness in the alert and threat tests were found, highlighting a consistency of prey capture patterns with measures of personality in other contexts. Personality may permeate even those behaviour patterns that appear relatively invariant.

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

4.5
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