Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 58, Issue 4, pp 351–360 | Cite as

Combining motions into complex displays: playbacks with a robotic lizard

  • Emília P. Martins
  • Terry J. Ord
  • Sarah W. Davenport
Original Article

Abstract

Complex displays composed of multiple, seemingly independent, units can result from sexual selection for increasingly variable, but redundant, displays and from potentially opposing selective pressures imposed by use of the display in multiple contexts. Our playback results support the latter, multireceiver hypothesis by confirming that two aspects of the sagebrush lizard headbob display (number of headbobs and use of display-specific body postures) are independently-meaningful components that are interpreted differently by different receivers. Male receivers use species-typical body postures to distinguish between aggressive and broadcast forms of the display, whereas female receivers are more attentive to the number of headbob motions, using these to distinguish male courtship from a challenge from a female competitor. Thus, display components are likely subject to different selective pressures and the display as a whole is evolving in response to a complex selective regime. Our example differs from other complex signals that have been considered in that both display elements involve dynamic motions (turned on and off by the display producer) as opposed to static signal elements (e.g., color, size). In addition, we found evidence that display structure is highly malleable, and that lizards both produce and respond to artificial displays that violate syntactic rules identified from field observations. Finally, our experiments demonstrate that a robotic lizard can be used effectively in playback studies of visual display behavior in lizards.

Keywords

Behavior Communication Evolution Lizard Robot playback Sceloporus graciosus Sexual selection 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Erin Kelso for making the model lizards and Julie Thompson for advice on assembling/programming the robot. We would also like to thank Barbara Clucas and three anonymous reviewers for comments on a previous version of this manuscript. These experiments have been approved by the Indiana University IACUC (03-122) and comply with all United States laws

Supplementary material

S1 Movie clip of the robotic lizard producing a species-typical headbob display as in Fig. 1a (QuickTime movie)

265_2005_954_ESM_movie.zip (1.6 mb)
Zip-archive (1.5 MB)

References

  1. Andersson S, Pryke SR, Ornborg J, Lawes MJ, Andersson M (2002) Multiple receivers, multiple ornaments, and a trade-off between agonistic and epigamic signaling in a widowbird. Am Nat 160:683–691Google Scholar
  2. Bels VL (1986) Analysis of the display-action-pattern of Anolis chlorocyanus (Sauria: Iguanidae). Copeia 1986:963–970Google Scholar
  3. Carpenter CC (1967) Aggression and social structure in iguanid lizards. In: Milstead WW (ed) Lizard ecology: a symposium. University of Missouri Press, Columbia, pp 87–105Google Scholar
  4. Carpenter CC (1978a) Comparative display behavior in the genus Sceloporus (Iguanidae). Contr Biol Geol Mil Pub Mus 18:1–71Google Scholar
  5. Carpenter CC (1978b) Ritualistic social behaviors in lizards. In: Greenberg N, MacLean PD (eds) Behavior and neurology of lizards. National Institute of Mental Health, Washington, pp 253–267Google Scholar
  6. Carpenter CC (1982) The aggressive displays of iguanine lizards. In: Burghardt GM, Rand AS (eds) Iguanas of the world: their behavior, ecology and conservation. Noyes Publications, Park Ridge New Jersey, pp 215–231Google Scholar
  7. Carpenter CC, Ferguson GW (1977) Variation and evolution of stereotyped behaviour in reptiles. In: Gans C, Tinkle D (eds) Biology of the Reptilia. Academic Press, London, pp 335–554Google Scholar
  8. Carpenter CC, Grubitz GG (1961) Time-motion study of a lizard. Ecology 42:199–200Google Scholar
  9. Decourcy KR, Jenssen TA (1994) Structure and use of male territorial headbob signals by the lizard Anolis carolinensis. Anim Behav 47:251–262Google Scholar
  10. Ferguson GW (1970) Variation and evolution of the push-up displays of the side-blotched lizard genus Uta (Iguanidae). Sys Zool 19:79–101Google Scholar
  11. Fleishman LJ (1988) Sensory influences on physical design of a visual display. Anim Behav 36:1420–1424Google Scholar
  12. Font EF, Kramer M (1989) A multivariate clustering approach to display repertoire analysis: headbobbing in Anolis equestris. Amph-Rept 10:331–344Google Scholar
  13. Hughes M (1996) The function of concurrent signals: visual and chemical communication in snapping shrimp. Anim Behav 52:247–257Google Scholar
  14. Iwasa Y, Pomiankowsk A (1994) The evolution of mate preferences for multiple handicaps. Evolution 48:853–867Google Scholar
  15. Jenssen TA (1971) Display analysis of Anolis nebulosus (Sauria, Iguanidae). Copeia 1971:197–209Google Scholar
  16. Jenssen TA (1975) Display repertoire of a male Phenacosaurus heterodermus (Sauria: Iguanidae). Herpetologica 31:48–55Google Scholar
  17. Jenssen TA (1977) Evolution of anoline lizard display behavior. Amer Zool 17:203–215Google Scholar
  18. Jenssen TA (1978) Display diversity in anoline lizards and problems in interpretation. In: Greenberg N, MacLean PD (eds) Behavior and neurology of lizards. National Institute of Mental Health, Washington, DC, pp 269–285Google Scholar
  19. Jenssen TA (1979) Display modifiers of Anolis opalinus (Lacertilia: Iguanidae). Herpetologica 35:21–30Google Scholar
  20. Jenssen TA, Rothblum LM (1977) Display repertoire analysis of Anolis townsendi (Sauria: Iguanidae) from Cocos Island. Copeia 1977:103–109Google Scholar
  21. Leal M (1999) Honest signalling during prey-predator interactions in the lizard Anolis cristatellus. Anim Behav 58:521–526Google Scholar
  22. Lovern MB, Jenssen TA (2001) The effects of context, sex, and body size on staged social interactions in juvenile male and female green anoles (Anolis carolinensis). Behaviour 138:1117–1135Google Scholar
  23. Lovern MB, Jenssen TA (2003) Form emergence and fixation of head bobbing displays in the green anole lizard (Anolis carolinensis): a reptilian model of signal ontogeny. J Comp Psych 117:133–141Google Scholar
  24. Maestripieri D, Roney JR (2005) Primate copulation calls and postcopulatory female choice. Behav Ecol 16:106–113Google Scholar
  25. Marchetti K (1998) The evolution of multiple male traits in the yellow-browed leaf warbler. Anim Behav 55:361–376Google Scholar
  26. Martins EP (1991) Individual and sex differences in the use of the push-up display by the sagebrush lizard, Sceloporus graciosus. Anim Behav 41:403–416Google Scholar
  27. Martins EP (1992) Structure, function and evolution of the Sceloporus push-up display. PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin-MadisonGoogle Scholar
  28. Martins EP (1993) Contextual use of the push-up display by the sagebrush lizard, Sceloporus graciosus. Anim Behav 45:25–36Google Scholar
  29. Martins EP (1994) Structural complexity in a lizard communication system: the Sceloporus graciosus ‘push-up’ display. Copeia 1994:944–955Google Scholar
  30. Martins EP, Lacy KE (2004) Complex behavior and ecology of rock iguanas. I. Evidence for an appeasement display. In: Alberts AC, Carter RL, Hayes WK, Martins EP (eds) Iguanas: biology and conservation. University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 101–108Google Scholar
  31. Martins EP, Bissell AN, Morgan KK (1998) Population differences in a lizard communicative display: evidence for rapid change in structure and function. Anim Behav 56:1113–1119Google Scholar
  32. Narins PM, Hodl W, Grabul DS (2003) Bimodal signal requisite for agonistic behavior in a dart-poison frog, Epipedobates femoralis. PNAS 100:577–580Google Scholar
  33. Ord TJ, Evans CS (2003) Display rate and opponent assessment in the Jacky dragon (Amphibolurus muricatus): an experimental analysis. Behaviour 140:1495–1508Google Scholar
  34. Ord TJ, Peters RA, Evans CS, Taylor A (2002) Digital video playback and visual communicaiton in lizards. Anim Behav 63:879–890Google Scholar
  35. Patricelli GL, Uy JAC, Walsh G, Borgia G (2002) Male displays adjusted to female’s response. Nature 415:279–280Google Scholar
  36. Peters RA, Clifford CWG, Evans CS (2002) Measuring the structure of dynamic visual signals. Anim Behav 64:131–146Google Scholar
  37. Peters RA, Evans CS (2003) Introductory tail-flick of the Jacky dragon visual display: signal efficacy depends upon duration. J Exp Biol 206:4293–4307Google Scholar
  38. Pomiankowski A, Iwasa Y (1993) Evolution of multiple sexual preferences by Fisher’s process of sexual selection. Proc R Soc Lond, B 253:173–181Google Scholar
  39. Roggenbuck ME, Jenssen TA (1986) The ontogeny of display behavior in Sceloporus undulatus (Sauria: Iguanidae). Ethology 71:153–165Google Scholar
  40. Rothblum L, Jenssen TA (1978) Display repertoire analysis of Sceloporus undulatus hyacinthinus (Sauria: Iguanidae) from South-Western Virginia. Anim Behav 26:130–137Google Scholar
  41. SPSS for Windows (2002). Standard Version Release 11.5.0. SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
  42. Stamps JA, Barlow GW (1973) Variation and stereotypy in the displays of Anolis aeneus (Sauria: Iguanidae). Behaviour 47:67–94Google Scholar
  43. Stuart-Fox D, Moussalli A, Marshall NJ, Owens IPF (2003) Conspicuous males suffer higher predation risk: visual modelling and experimental evidence from lizards. Anim Behav 66:541–550Google Scholar
  44. Thompson JT (2002) Complex traits: multimodal behavior and convergent evolution. PhD dissertation. University of Oregon, EugeneGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emília P. Martins
    • 1
  • Terry J. Ord
    • 2
    • 3
  • Sarah W. Davenport
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biology and the Center for the Integrative Study of Animal BehaviorIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiologyIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  3. 3.Division of Biological Sciences, Section of Evolution and EcologyUniversity of California at DavisDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations