4.5 Article

Risk-taking behavior in the lesser wax moth: disentangling within- and between-individual variation

期刊

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY
卷 67, 期 2, 页码 257-264

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00265-012-1445-x

关键词

Developmental plasticity; Phenotypic plasticity; Predation; Repeatability; Achroia grisella; Sexual signaling

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [FOR 1232]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Behaviors that appear to be plastic may well be determined by environmental influences during development. Being able to produce a wide range of variants of one kind of behavior, e.g., a very short and a very long response time to a stimulus under different environmental conditions, can be described as behavioral plasticity. How such behavioral reaction norms develop for individuals is poorly understood, but several factors are likely to play a role. We investigated what factors may affect how the risk-taking behavior of the lesser wax moth, Achroia grisella, is shaped during ontogeny. We manipulated larval density to represent the potential intensity of future competition for females in a lek of males, determined adult moths' reaction to predator signals, and tested for plasticity in the silence response, i.e., the acoustic evasion behavior of the moths during the experiments. While we found no effect of larval density on either the probability or the duration of the silence response, 11 % of the variance in duration could be explained by differences between families, and 30 % of the variance was the result of differences between individuals. We found evidence for habituation to the predator signal, clearly indicating that the silence response is a plastic-enough trait to be adjustable to the immediate environment. These results suggest that the degree to which individuals take risks in the context of acoustic signaling depends more on the immediate context and, possibly, genetic differentiation than it is a product of adaptive developmental plasticity.

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