|
|
Ajie, B. C., Pintor, L. M., Watters, J., Kerby, J. L., Hammond, J. I., & Sih, A. (2007). A framework for determining the fitness consequences of antipredator behavior. Behav. Ecol., 18(1), 267–270.
Abstract: Behavioral ecologists have long been interested in understanding the adaptive value of antipredator behavior (Sih 1987Go; Lima and Dill 1990Go; Lima 1998Go). A recent review by Lind and Cresswell (2005)Go, however, noted some important difficulties with quantifying the fitness consequences of antipredator behaviors. In essence, Lind and Cresswell suggest that most studies do not provide strong evidence on the adaptive value of antipredator behavior because they do not consider 1) trade-offs between antipredator and reproductive performance, 2) the abilities of organisms to avoid fitness losses associated with constraints on focal traits by employing behavioral alternatives (behavioral compensation), and 3) the effects of behavioral defenses at different stages of the predation sequence. The authors rightfully assert that an understanding of these issues can only be accomplished by measuring multiple traits and fitness components (i.e., survival and reproduction). Nevertheless, the question of how to integrate such data into
|
|
|
|
McElreath, R., Luttbeg, B., Fogarty, S. P., Brodin, T., & Sih, A. (2007). Evolution of animal personalities. Nature, 450(7167), E5.
|
|
|
|
Sih, A., Bell, A., & Johnson, J. C. (2004). Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends. Ecol. Evol, 19(7), 372–378.
Abstract: Recent studies suggest that populations and species often exhibit behavioral syndromes; that is, suites of correlated behaviors across situations. An example is an aggression syndrome where some individuals are more aggressive, whereas others are less aggressive across a range of situations and contexts. The existence of behavioral syndromes focuses the attention of behavioral ecologists on limited (less than optimal) behavioral plasticity and behavioral carryovers across situations, rather than on optimal plasticity in each isolated situation. Behavioral syndromes can explain behaviors that appear strikingly non-adaptive in an isolated context (e.g. inappropriately high activity when predators are present, or excessive sexual cannibalism). Behavioral syndromes can also help to explain the maintenance of individual variation in behavioral types, a phenomenon that is ubiquitous, but often ignored. Recent studies suggest that the behavioral type of an individual, population or species can have important ecological and evolutionary implications, including major effects on species distributions, on the relative tendencies of species to be invasive or to respond well to environmental change, and on speciation rates. Although most studies of behavioral syndromes to date have focused on a few organisms, mainly in the laboratory, further work on other species, particularly in the field, should yield numerous new insights.
|
|
|
|
Sih, A., Hanser, S., & McHugh, K. (2009). Social network theory: new insights and issues for behavioral ecologists. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol., 63(7), 975–988.
Abstract: Abstract Until recently, few studies have used social network theory (SNT) and metrics to examine how social network structure (SNS) might influence social behavior and social dynamics in non-human animals. Here, we present an overview of why and how the social network approach might be useful for behavioral ecology. We first note four important aspects of SNS that are commonly observed, but relatively rarely quantified: (1) that within a social group, differences among individuals in their social experiences and connections affect individual and group outcomes; (2) that indirect connections can be important (e.g., partners of your partners matter); (3) that individuals differ in their importance in the social network (some can be considered keystone individuals); and (4) that social network traits often carry over across contexts (e.g., SN position in male–male competition can influence later male mating success). We then discuss how these four points, and the social network approach in general, can yield new insights and questions for a broad range of issues in behavioral ecology including: mate choice, alternative mating tactics, male–male competition, cooperation, reciprocal altruism, eavesdropping, kin selection, dominance hierarchies, social learning, information flow, social foraging, and cooperative antipredator behavior. Finally, we suggest future directions including: (1) integrating behavioral syndromes and SNT; (2) comparing space use and SNS; (3) adaptive partner choice and SNS; (4) the dynamics and stability (or instability) of social networks, and (5) group selection shaping SNS.
|
|
