chapter 1 exploratory behavior profiles
Post on 19-Oct-2014
1.431 views
DESCRIPTION
My presentation at the 31st International Ethological Conference in Rennes, France in the Animal Personality Symposium on Friday, August 21, 2009TRANSCRIPT
What behavioral syndrome? Individual differences and multiple exploratory behavioral profiles in
prairie voles
Danielle N. Lee* & Zuleyma Tang-MartínezDepartment of Biology
University of Missouri-St. Louis
Animal personality research
Behavioral Syndromes: Suites of related behaviors across situations or contexts
– Correlation of behaviors– Behavioral plasticity limited
• Context• Stability
Behavioral Stability
• Broad– Correlations of behavior
across different contexts or functional categories
• Domain specific– Correlations of behavior
within a single context or functional behavioral category
• Trait response (Stable)– Behavioral responses that
are consistent from one situation to another
• State response (Unstable)– Behavioral responses that
occur in a specific situation (not consistent from one situation to another)
Behavioral Context
Kopp, Voge & Misslin 1999
Behavioral Stability
• Broad– Correlations of behavior
across different contexts or functional categories
• Domain specific– Correlations of behavior
within a single context or functional behavioral category
• Trait response (Stable)– Behavioral responses that
are consistent from one situation to another
• State response (Unstable)– Behavioral responses that
occur in a specific situation (not consistent from one situation to another)
Behavioral Context
Broad behavioral SyndromeCorrelations of behavior across different contexts or functional categories
• Wilson et al. 1993• Pumpkin-seed sunfish,
Lepomis gibbosus• Multiple Contexts
(Exploration & Social)Bold fish were more likely to
approach novel objects and swim in closer proximity to other fish compared to shy fish Image credit: Encyclopaedia
Brittanica
Domain-specific Behavioral SyndromeCorrelations of behavior within a single context or functional behavioral category
• Verbeek et al. 1994• Great tits, Parus major• Single Context
(Exploration)Fast novel room explorers
are also fast novel object explorers
Image credit: http://www.thebirdsofsussex.co.uk/
Behavioral Stability
• Broad– Correlations of behavior
across different contexts or functional categories
• Domain specific– Correlations of behavior
within a single context or functional behavioral category
• Trait response (Stable)– Behavioral responses that
are consistent from one situation to another
• State response (Unstable)– Behavioral responses that
occur in a specific situation (not consistent from one situation to another)
Behavioral Context
Behavioral Syndromes Hypotheses Hierarchy
• H0: no correlations of behavior responses across situations or contexts = no syndrome = STATE RESPONSE
• H1: correlations of behavior response across situations or contexts = syndrome = TRAIT RESPONSE
• H1a: correlations of behavior responses within one context = DOMAIN SPECIFIC
• H1b: correlations of behavioral responses across two or more contexts = BROAD
OBJECTIVE• To examine individual variation in a single
context – EXPLORATION
QUESTIONS• Is variation in individual behavior consistent
across different tests?• If so, then do these consistent differences in
behavior contribute to a behavioral syndrome?
Exploratory behavior
• Functional behavior category widely studied• Tendency to investigate novel environments
and/or objects• Spontaneous behavioral responses• Indicates how animals might gather
information about local environment and its resources
Microtus ochrogasterprairie vole
Methods
• Three Exploratory tests– Open-field with novel objects – Exploratory maze– Two-way novel choice apparatus
Open-field with Novel Objects TestDependent Variables:
1)Latency
2)Time in the novel environment
3)Time with novel objects
4)Returns
5)Instantaneous scan of location
a) Total squaresb) Visits to each section
Exploratory Maze Test
Dependent Variables:
1)Latency
2)Number of times each arm was entered
3)Returns to the start box
Novel Choice Test
Dependent Variables:
1)Latency
2)Time to reach the first terminal
3)Time to reach the second terminal
4)Total time to complete the test
Overall Predictions
• Lower latency • More time spent
interacting with novel stimuli
• Higher spatial scores
less exploratory more exploratory
•Higher latency •Less time spent interacting with novel stimuli•Lower spatial scores
Statistical Analysis
• PCA analysis for each exploratory test• Identified the key dependent variables
– PC1 accounted for the highest % of variance– All dependent variables that scored above .80 that
explained PC1 – called Key Dependent Variables
• Ranked each Key DV• Computed the overall Exploratory Score for each
individual in each test• Correlate Exploratory scores across tests
Exploratory Scores Continuum
• Open-field with novel objects test• Exploratory Maze test• Two-way novel choice test
lower exploratory scores higher exploratory scores
Open-field with novel objects test
1 2 3
Latency to depart start box -.353 -.243 .866
Total squares visited .638 .656 -.046
Returns -.711 .303 -.250
Time in novel environment .820 .476 .166
Time with novelties .675 .015 .235
Visits to center squares -.624 .603 .288
Visits to edge squares .945 .005 .106
Ratio of visits to center: edge squares
.553 -.573 -.105
Components
PC 1 explains 46.9% of the variancePC 2 explains 18.7 %PC 3 explains 12.5 %
N = 10258 females44 males
Exploratory maze test
PC 1 explains 58% of the variancePC 2 explains 19%
1 2
Latency to depart start box -.593 .526
Returns .306 -.857
Visits to arm 1 .787 .139
Visits to arm 2 .818 .279
Visits to arm 3 .888 .069
Sum of visits to all arms .979 .179
N = 9853 females45 males
Components
Novel choice apparatus test
1 2 3
Latency to depart start box .753 -.316 .154
Time to reach 1st terminal .860 -.316 .103
Time to reach 2nd terminal .821 -.323 -.038
Total test time (minus latency)
.906 -.347 .017
Components
PC 1 explains 54% of the variancePC 2 explains18%PC3 explains 13 %
N = 14183 females58 males
Correlations of Exploratory Scores across all three tests
Open-field testExploratory Score
Novel choice testExploratory Score
Novel choice test Exploratory Score
r = .075
p = .602------
Maze test Exploratory Score
r = -.052
p = .717
r = -.265
p = .060
N = 5126 females25 males
No correlated suites of behavior across test situations.
Discussion
• Behavior in one situation did not correlate or predict behavior in a different situation
• Behavioral responses are distinct and stand alone
• Animals interpret context differently• Null hypothesis in hierarchy
Behavioral Syndromes Hypotheses Hierarchy
• H0: no correlations of behavior responses across situations or contexts = no syndrome = STATE RESPONSE
• H1: correlations of behavior response across situations or contexts = syndrome = TRAIT RESPONSE
• H1a: correlations of behavior responses within one context = DOMAIN SPECIFIC
• H1b: correlations of behavioral responses across two or more contexts = BROAD
• Fox et al. (2009). Mountain chickadees, Poecile gambeli, – Exploration in a novel room and with novel objects
• Nelson et al. (2008). Roosters, Gallus gallus domesticus– calling behavior in three different contexts: anti-
predator, territoriality, and foraging in both a real and a virtual environment
• Dingemanse (2008). Sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus • Adriaenssens & Johnsson (2008). Brown trout, Salmo trutta • Milderman (2008) Starlings, Sturnus vulgaris• Snekser et al. (2008). Damselfish, Stegastes leucostictus
Historical accounts
• Context – Learning ability and congition
• Selected lines of “bright” and “dull” rats
• Various labyrinth mazes
• No two trials of the exact same test correlated with any degree of reliability. Tolman (1924)
• Learning ability is specific to the apparatus. Tryon (1940), Searle (1949)
Take home messages
• No single test can serve as a proxy for an entire domain
• Test domain-specific syndromes first, then broad
• Do not assume evidence of broad behavioral syndromes means domain-specific behavioral syndromes also exist
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS• Fritz Trillmich & Robyn Hudson• The Tang Gang
Gena Sbeglia, Laura Kent, Elizabeth Congdon, Javier Hernandez
• Blog readers and SM supporters• Jasmine Clayton, Robert Clayton,
Allison Clayton• Stan Braude, Karen Norberg, Lon
Wilkens, George Taylor• David Chisholm• Lab Assistants
– Meital Laks, Dominique Craven, Evynn Craven, AnnaLynn Harris, Dianne Voorhis
• American Society of Mammalogists GIAR
• TWA Scholarship for Environmental Science
• Dr. John P. Rier Biology Student Travel Award
• Animal Behavior Society Young Scientist International Travel Award (ABS-NSF)