Advertisement

Journal of Ethology

, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 221–228 | Cite as

Comparison of personality between juveniles and adults in clonal gecko species

  • Osamu Sakai
Article

Abstract

The developmental perspectives of animal personality enhance our understanding of how personality structure changes in relation to life stage. Clonal animals are ideal models for developmental studies because personality differences can be solely attributed to environmental factors. Here, I investigated the presence of personality within a species of clonal gecko, Lepidodactylus lugubris, at different developmental stages. For juveniles and adult geckos, I measured exploration (reaction to a novel situation) and boldness (risk-prone tendency) and evaluated repeatability and correlation of these behavioural traits. Each gecko exhibited different exploration and boldness with significant repeatability through time but no correlation between these behavioural traits. Small juveniles were composed of only bold and low explorative individuals but large juveniles and adults were composed of various personality type individuals. These results demonstrate that subject geckos have a similar personality structure across life stages and that exploration and boldness are independent personality without forming behavioural syndrome structure. Biased composition of personality type between life stages suggests that appearance of different personality type individuals during an early ontogenetic stage generates personality variation within the clonal population. This study provides developmental insight about personality structure and its composition in clonal animals living in the wild.

Keywords

Animal personality Developmental stage Clonal animal Parthenogenetic gecko Lepidodactylus lugubris 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to A. Mori for meaningful comments and discussion of my work, reviewing the manuscript, and providing accommodation near the field site. I would like to thank C. Barnett for useful comments on this manuscript. I also appreciate the support and encouragement of the members of the Laboratory of Ethology, Kyoto University. The present study was carried out in compliance with the guidelines of the Animal Care and Use Committee of Kyoto University. The field survey was conducted with permission from the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Okinawa Prefecture. I declare that I have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Andrews RM (1982) Patterns of growth in reptiles. In: Gans C, Pough FH (eds) Biology of the Reptilia, vol 13. Academic Press, New York, pp 273–320Google Scholar
  2. Bajer K, Horváth G, Molnár O, Török J, Garamszegi LZ, Herczeg G (2015) European green lizard (Lacerta viridis) personalities: linking behavioural types to ecologically relevant traits at different ontogenetic stages. Behav Processes 111:67–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2014.11.020 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bateman PW, Fleming PA (2009) To cut a long tail short: a review of lizard caudal autotomy studies carried out over the last 20 years. J Zool 277:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2008.00484.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bauer AM (1990) Gekkonid lizards as prey of invertebrates and predators of vertebrates. Herpetol Rev 21:83–87Google Scholar
  5. Bell AM, Hankison SJ, Laskowski KL (2009) The repeatability of behaviour: a meta-analysis. Anim Behav 77:771–783.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.12.022 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolger DT, Case TJ (1992) Intra- and interspecific interference behaviour among sexual and asexual geckos. Anim Behav 44:21–30.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80750-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carere C, Maestripieri D (eds) (2013) Animal personalities: behavior, physiology, and evolution. University of Chicago Press, CicagoGoogle Scholar
  8. Carter AJ, Feeney WE, Marshall HH, Cowlishaw G, Heinsohn R (2013) Animal personality: What are behavioural ecologists measuring? Biol Rev 88:465–475.  https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Class B, Brommer JE (2015) A strong genetic correlation underlying a behavioural syndrome disappears during development because of genotype-age interactions. Proc R Soc B 282:20142777.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2777 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dingemanse NJ, Dochtermann NA (2013) Quantifying individual variation in behaviour: mixed-effect modelling approaches. J Anim Ecol 82:39–54.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Favati A, Zidar J, Thorpe H, Jensen P, Løvlie H (2016) The ontogeny of personality traits in the red junglefowl, Gallus gallus. Behav Ecol 27:484–493.  https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv177 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Freund J, Brandmaier MA, Lewejohann L, Kirste I, Kritzler M, Krüger A, Sachser N, Lindenberger U, Kempermann G (2013) Emergence of individuality in genetically identical mice. Science 340:756–759.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1235294 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Garamszegi LZ, Markó G, Herczeg G (2012) A meta-analysis of correlated behaviours with implications for behavioural syndromes: mean effect size, publication bias, phylogenetic effects and the role of mediator variables. Evol Ecol 26:1213–1235.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-012-9589-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gosling SD (2001) From mice to men: what can we learn about personality from animal research? Psychol Bull 127:45–86.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.45 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Groothuis TGG, Trillmich F (2011) Unfolding personalities: the importance of studying ontogeny. Dev Psychobiol 53:641–655.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20574 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Guenther A, Finkemeier M-A, Trillmich F (2014) The ontogeny of personality in the wild guinea pig. Anim Behav 90:131–139.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.01.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gyuris E, Feró O, Barta Z (2012) Personality traits across ontogeny in firebugs, Pyrrhocoris apterus. Anim Behav 84:103–109.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.04.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoehn M, Henle K, Gruber B (2015) The effect of toe-clipping on the survival of gecko and skink species. Herpetol Conserv Biol 10:242–252.  https://doi.org/10.3167/sa.2014.580207 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ineich I (1988) Evidence for a unisexual–bisexual complex in the gekkonid lizard Lepidodactylus lugubris in French Polynesia. Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des Sci Ser 3(307):271–277Google Scholar
  20. Ineich I (1999) Spatio–temporal analysis of the unisexual–bisexual Lepidodactylus lugubris complex (Reptilia, Gekkonidae). In: Ota H (ed) Tropical island herpetofauna: origin, current diversity, and conservation. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 199–228Google Scholar
  21. Ineich I, Ota H (1992) Additional remarks on the unisexual-bisexual complex of the gecko, Lepidodactylus lugubris, in Takapoto atoll, French Polynesia. Bull Coll Sci Univ Ryukyus 53:31–39Google Scholar
  22. Kearney M, Fujita MK, Ridenour J (2009) Lost sex in the reptiles: constraints and correlations. In: Schön I, Martens K, Dijk P (eds) Lost sex: the evolutionary biology of parthenogenesis. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 447–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Killen SS, Marras S, Metcalfe NB, McKenzie DJ, Domenici P (2013) Environmental stressors alter relationships between physiology and behaviour. Trends Ecol Evol 28:651–658.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.05.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kuznetsova A, Brockhoff PB, Christensen RHB (2015) lmerTest: tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0–25. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTest. Accessed 3 May 2015
  25. Lewejohann L, Zipser B, Sachser N (2011) “Personality” in laboratory mice used for biomedical research: a way of understanding variability? Dev Psychobiol 53:624–630.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20553 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Mas-Muñoz J, Komen H, Schneider O, Visch SW, Schrama JW (2011) Feeding behaviour, swimming activity and boldness explain variation in feed intake and growth of sole (Solea solea) reared in captivity. PLoS One 6:e21393.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021393 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Moritz C, Case TJ, Bolger DT, Donnellan S (1993) Genetic diversity and the history of pacific island house geckos (Hemidactylus and Lepidodactylus). Biol J Linn Soc 48:113–133.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.1993.tb00882.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Müller T, Müller C (2015) Behavioural phenotypes over the lifetime of a holometabolous insect. Front Zool 12:S8.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-12-S1-S8 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Murakami Y, Sugawara H, Takahashi H, Hayashi F (2015) Population genetic structure and distribution patterns of sexual and asexual gecko species in the Ogasawara Islands. Ecol Res 30:471–478.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11284-015-1246-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Niemelä PT, DiRienzo N, Hedrick AV (2012) Predator-induced changes in the boldness of naïve field crickets, Gryllus integer, depends on behavioural type. Anim Behav 84:129–135.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.04.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ota H (1994) Female reproductive cycles in the northernmost populations of the two gekkonid lizards, Hemidactylus frenatus and Lepidodactylus lugubris. Ecol Res 9:121–130.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02347487 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ota H, Toda M, Masunaga G, Toda M (2004) Feral populations of amphibians and reptiles in the Ryukyu archipelago, Japan. Glob Environ Res 8:133–143Google Scholar
  33. Paulissen MA, Meyer HA (2000) The effect of toe-clipping on the gecko Hemidactylus turcicus. J Herpetol 34:282–285.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1565425 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Perry G, Wallace MC, Perry D, Curzer H, Muhlberger P (2011) Toe clipping of amphibians and reptiles: science, ethics, and the law. J Herpetol 45:547–555.  https://doi.org/10.1670/11-037.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Petelle MB, McCoy DE, Alejandro V, Martin JGA, Blumstein DT (2013) Development of boldness and docility in yellow-bellied marmots. Anim Behav 86:1147–1154.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.09.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Radtkey RR, Donnellan SC, Fisher RN, Moritz C, Hanley KA, Case TJ (1995) When species collide: the origin and spread of an asexual species of gecko. Proc R Soc B 259:145–152.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1995.0022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Réale D, Reader SM, Sol D, McDougall PT, Dingemanse NJ (2007) Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biol Rev 82:291–318.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2007.00010.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Sakai O (2016) Size distribution suggests a seasonal effect on reproduction of Lepidodactylus lugubris on Okinawajima Island, Japan, the northernmost distributional area. Curr Herpetol 35:59–63.  https://doi.org/10.5358/hsj.35.59 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schuett W, Dall SRX, Baeumer J, Kloesener MH, Nakagawa S, Beinlich F, Eggers T (2011) Personality variation in a clonal insect: the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum. Dev Psychobiol 53:631–640.  https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20538 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Schuett W, Dall SRX, Kloesener MH, Baeumer J, Beinlich F, Eggers T (2014) Life-history trade-offs mediate “personality” variation in two colour morphs of the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum. J Anim Ecol 84:90–101.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12263 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sih A, Bell AM, Jhonson JC, Ziemba RE (2004) Behavioral syndromes: an integrative overview. Q Rev Biol 79:241–277.  https://doi.org/10.1086/422893 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Smith BR, Blumstein DT (2008) Fitness consequences of personality: a meta-analysis. Behav Ecol 19:448–455.  https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arm144 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stamps J, Groothuis TGG (2010) The development of animal personality: relevance, concepts and perspectives. Biol Rev 85:301–325.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2009.00103.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna (Austria): R foundation for statistical computing. http://www.R-project.org/
  45. Tellegen A, Lykken DT, Bouchard TJ, Wilcox KJ, Segal NL, Rich S (1988) Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. J Pers Soc Psychol 54:1031–1039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vrijenhoek RC (1994) Unisexual fish: model systems for studying ecology and evolution. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 25:71–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wexler Y, Subach A, Pruitt JN, Scharf I (2016) Behavioral repeatability of flour beetles before and after metamorphosis and throughout aging. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70:745–753.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-016-2098-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilmhoff CD, Csepeggi CE, Petren K (2003) Characterization of dinucleotide microsatellite markers in the parthenogenetic mourning gecko (Lepidodactylus lugubris). Mol Ecol Notes 3:400–402.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1471-8286.2003.00459.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wilson DS, Clark AB, Coleman K, Dearstyne T (1994) Shyness and boldness in humans and other animals. Trends Ecol Evol 9:442–446.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(94)90134-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wuerz Y, Krüger O (2015) Personality over ontogeny in zebra finches: long-term repeatable traits but unstable behavioural syndromes. Front Zool 12:S9.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-12-S1-S9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. Yamashiro S, Toda M, Ota H (2000) Clonal composition of the parthenogenetic gecko, Lepidodactylus lugubris, at the northernmost extremity of its range. Zoolog Sci 17:1013–1020.  https://doi.org/10.2108/zsj.17.1013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Zoology, Graduate School of ScienceKyoto UniversitySakyoJapan

Personalised recommendations