Advertisement

Individual behavior, behavioral stability, and pace of life within and among five shrew species

  • Sophie von MertenEmail author
  • Niels J. Dingemanse
  • Maria da Luz Mathias
  • Leszek Rychlik
Original Article

Abstract

Phenotypic variation in behavior exists among species and populations, as well as among and within individuals. The pace-of-life syndrome hypothesis predicts covariation between life-history strategies, ranging from slow to fast, and behavior, ranging from shy, inactive, and flexible to bold, active, and less flexible. This covariation is expected to exist at multiple hierarchical levels, from the species down to the individual. We predict that fast-lived species will differ in average levels of behavior, and additionally show lower within-individual and among-individual variation than slow-lived ones. Shrews represent a highly suitable model to test these predictions, as they comprise a range of genera which differ tremendously in life-history strategy and metabolism. We performed repeated tests of boldness and aggression on 155 wild-caught individuals of five species of shrews, two species of the slow-lived genus Crocidura, two of the fast-lived genus Sorex, and one of the intermediate-paced genus Neomys. To compare not only average levels of behavior but also its variance components between those groups, we calculated coefficients of variation at within- and among-individual levels. Our results support our first prediction that, following the framework of pace-of-life-syndromes, fast-lived species should exhibit bolder behavior than slow-lived ones. However, our prediction of lower within- and among-individual variation in fast-lived species was not supported. Instead, our data suggest that other ecological factors might influence the expression of behavioral variation in shrew species, such as the variability in habitat choice and differences in anti-predator strategies.

Significance statement

The behavior and life history of animals are often structured into so-called pace-of-life syndromes (POLS), with slow-lived individuals being rather shy, inactive, and flexible and fast-lived individuals rather bold, active, and less flexible. Comparing the behavior in five species of shrews, we tested if such a gradient can also be found on the species level. While the average levels of species’ behavior indeed matched their pace of life, their individual behavior and behavioral stability did not. It was rather explained by an interplay of ecological and physiological factors, among them the variability in habitat choices and differences in anti-predator strategies. Our study shows that behavioral variation cannot be explained by just one factor like POLS at different hierarchical levels, but rather by a combination of factors including the animals’ life-history and ecological and physiological background.

Keywords

Variance partitioning Personality Shrews Coefficient of variation Behavioral repeatability Life-history strategies 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Ana Cerveira, Diogo Barros, Fernando Madeira, Flávio Oliveira, Krzysztof Kowalski, and Pawel Kardynia for the help in the field; Anna Grozelier, Anna Kret, and Karla Bauer for the help in the field and with experiments; and Petri Niemelä for the advice in statistics. Further thanks are given to two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of our manuscript. Special thanks are given to Joaquim Tapisso for many fruitful discussions.

Funding information

This work was supported by a Marie-Curie post-doc fellowship (PIEF-GA-2012-332,331) and an FCT post-doc fellowship (SFRH/BPD/118053/2016) to SvM; the budget of the Department of Systematic Zoology AMU; and CESAM (UID / AMB / 50,017/2019) through national funds by FCT/MCTES. NJD is supported by the German Science Foundation (grant no. DI 1694/1-1).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. Capturing and testing were conducted with approval from the relevant governmental review board of each region: Regionalna Dyrekcja Ochrony Środowiska w Poznaniu (WPN-II.6401.143.2013.AG) for Poznań, Poland; Regierung von Oberbayern (55.1-8642-8-2007) for Starnberg, Germany; Regierungspräsidium Freiburg (35-9185.81/G-14/55) for Konstanz, Germany; and Ministério da Agricultura, do Mar do Ambiente e do Ordenamento do Território (01/2014/CAPT) for Portugal.

Supplementary material

265_2019_2793_MOESM1_ESM.docx (530 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 530 kb)

References

  1. Archer J (1973) Tests for emotionality in rats and mice - review. Anim Behav 21:205–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baird HP, Patullo BW, Macmillan DL (2006) Reducing aggression between freshwater crayfish (Cherax destructor Clark: Decapoda, Parastacidae) by increasing habitat complexity. Aquac Res 37:1419–1428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baxter-Gilbert J, Riley JL, Whiting MJ (2019) Bold new world: urbanization promotes an innate behavioral trait in a lizard. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 73:105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell AM, Sih A (2007) Exposure to predation generates personality in threespined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Ecol Lett 10:828–834PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benus RF, den Daas S, Koolhaas JM, van Oortmerssen GA (1990) Routine formation and flexibility in social and non-social behaviour of aggressive and non-aggressive male mice. Behaviour 112:176–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Botero CA, Weissing FJ, Wright J, Rubenstein DR (2015) Evolutionary tipping points in the capacity to adapt to environmental change. P Natl Acad Sci USA 112:184–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bouskila A (1995) Interactions between predation risk and competition: a field study of kangaroo rats and snakes. Ecology 76:165–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown C, Jones F, Braithwaite V (2005) In situ examination of boldness–shyness traits in the tropical poeciliid, Brachyraphis episcopi. Anim Behav 70:1003–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Careau V, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Thomas DW, Reale D, Humphries MM (2009) Exploration strategies map along fast-slow metabolic and life-history continua in muroid rodents. Funct Ecol 23:150–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Christensen B (1996) Predator foraging capabilities and prey antipredator behaviours: pre-versus postcapture constraints on size-dependent predator-prey interactions. Oikos 76:368–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Churchfield S (1990) The natural history of shrews. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  12. Churchfield S (1994) Foraging strategies of shrews, and the evidence from field studies. In: Merritt JF, Kirkland GL, Rose RK (eds) Advances in the biology of shrews., vol 18. Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, USA, pp 77-87Google Scholar
  13. Churchfield S, Rychlik L (2006) Diets and coexistence in Neomys and Sorex shrews in Białowieża forest, eastern Poland. J Zool 269:381–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cleasby IR, Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H (2015) Quantifying the predictability of behaviour: statistical approaches for the study of between-individual variation in the within-individual variance. Methods Ecol Evol 6:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coppens CM, de Boer SF, Koolhaas JM (2010) Coping styles and behavioural flexibility: towards underlying mechanisms. Philos Trans R Soc B 365:4021–4028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dahirel M, Vong A, Ansart A, Madec L (2017) Individual boldness is life stage-dependent and linked to dispersal in a hermaphrodite land snail. Ecol Res 32:751–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dall SRX, Bell AM, Bolnick DI, Ratnieks FL (2012) An evolutionary ecology of individual differences. Ecol Lett 15:1189–1198PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dammhahn M, Dingemanse NJ, Niemelä PT, Réale D (2018) Pace-of-life syndromes: a framework for the adaptive integration of behaviour, physiology and life history. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Deventer SA, Uhl F, Bugnyar T, Miller R, Fitch WT, Schiestl M, Ringler M, Schwab C (2016) Behavioural type affects space use in a wild population of crows (Corvus corone). Ethology 122:881–891PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dingemanse NJ, Wright J, Kazem AJ, Thomas DK, Hickling R, Dawnay N (2007) Behavioural syndromes differ predictably between 12 populations of three-spined stickleback. J Anim Ecol 76:1128–1138PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Dingemanse NJ, Barber I, Dochtermann NA (2020) Non-consumptive effects of predation: does perceived risk strengthen the genetic integration of behaviour and morphology in stickleback? Ecol Lett 23:107–118PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Edwards PD, Palme R, Boonstra R (2016) Seasonal programming, not competition or testosterone, drives stress-axis changes in a partially-semelparous mammal. Horm Behav 85:96–101PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Foster SA (1999) The geography of behaviour: an evolutionary perspective. Trends Ecol Evol 14:190–195PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Frynta D, Kaftanová-Eliášová B, Žampachová B, Voráčková P, Sádlová J, Landová E (2018) Behavioural strategies of three wild-derived populations of the house mouse (Mus m. musculus and M. m. domesticus) in five standard tests of exploration and boldness: searching for differences attributable to subspecies and commensalism. Behav Process 157:133–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gracceva G, Herde A, Groothuis TGG, Koolhaas JM, Palme R, Eccard JA (2014) Turning shy on a winter’s day: effects of season on personality and stress response in Microtus arvalis. Ethology 120:753–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hijmans RJ, Cameron SE, Parra JL, Jones PG, Jarvis A (2005) Very high resolution interpolated climate surfaces for global land areas. Int J Climatol 25:1965–1978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holbrook CT, Wright CM, Pruitt JN (2014) Individual differences in personality and behavioural plasticity facilitate division of labour in social spider colonies. Anim Behav 97:177–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Holtmann B, Lagisz M, Nakagawa S (2017) Metabolic rates, and not hormone levels, are a likely mediator of between-individual differences in behaviour: a meta-analysis. Funct Ecol 31:685–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Houle D (1992) Comparing evolvability and variability of quantitative traits. Genetics 130:195–204PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Innes DGL (1994) Life histories of the Soricidae. In: Merritt JF, Kirkland GL, Rose RK (eds) Advances in the biology of shrews, vol 18. Carnegie Museum of Natural History, Pittsburgh, pp 111–136Google Scholar
  31. Jensen SP, Gray SJ, Hurst JL (2005) Excluding neighbours from territories: effects of habitat structure and resource distribution. Anim Behav 69:785–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Knotts ER (2017) Influences of individual phenotypic traits on the habitat preferences of the sand fiddler crab, Uca pugilator. Behaviour 154:741–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kobler A, Maes GE, Humblet Y, Volckaert FA, Eens M (2011) Temperament traits and microhabitat use in bullhead, Cottus perifretum: fish associated with complex habitats are less aggressive. Behaviour 148:603–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Koolhaas JM, Korte SM, de Boer SF, van der Vegt BJ, van Reenen CG, Hopster H, de Jong IC, Ruis MA, Blokhuis HJ (1999) Coping styles in animals: current status in behavior and stress-physiology. Neurosci Biobehav R 23:925–935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kowalski K, Rychlik L (2018) The role of venom in the hunting and hoarding of prey differing in body size by the Eurasian water shrew, Neomys fodiens. J Mammal 99:351–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kowalski K, Marciniak P, Rosiński G, Rychlik L (2017) Evaluation of the physiological activity of venom from the Eurasian water shrew Neomys fodiens. Front Zool 14:46PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Krushinska NL, Rychlik L (1994) Aggressiveness of a Neomys fodiens parous female towards conspecific and N. anomalus intruders. Acta Theriol 39:329–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lapiedra O, Chejanovski Z, Kolbe JJ (2017) Urbanization and biological invasion shape animal personalities. Glob Chang Biol 23:592–603PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. Laskowski KL, Pearish S, Bensky M, Bell AM (2015) Predictors of individual variation in movement in a natural population of threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Adv Ecol Res 52:65–90PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mazza V, Eccard JA, Zaccaroni M, Jacob J, Dammhahn M (2018) The fast and the flexible: cognitive style drives individual variation in cognition in a small mammal. Anim Behav 137:119–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mettke-Hofmann C, Winkler H, Leisler B (2002) The significance of ecological factors for exploration and neophobia in parrots. Ethology 108:249–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Michalak I (1983) Reproduction, maternal and social behaviour of the European water shrew under laboratory conditions. Acta Theriol 28:3–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Michelangeli M, Goulet CT, Kang HS, Wong BB, Chapple DG (2018) Integrating thermal physiology within a syndrome: locomotion, personality and habitat selection in an ectotherm. Funct Ecol 32:970–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Montiglio P-O, Dammhahn M, Messier GD, Réale D (2018) The pace-of-life syndrome revisited: the role of ecological conditions and natural history on the slow-fast continuum. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Moraleva N (1989) Intraspecific interactions in the common shrew Sorex araneus in Central Siberia. Ann Zool Fenn 26:425–432Google Scholar
  46. Moss S, Tittaferrante S, Way GP, Fuller A, Sullivan N, Ruhl N, McRobert SP (2015) Interactions between aggression, boldness and shoaling within a brood of convict cichlids (Amatitlania nigrofasciatus). Behav Process 121:63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nagel A (1977) Torpor in the European white-toothed shrews. Experientia 33:1455–1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Oliveira FG, Tapisso JT, Monarca RI, Cerveira AM, Mathias ML (2016) Phenotypic flexibility in the energetic strategy of the greater white-toothed shrew, Crocidura russula. J Therm Biol 56:10–17PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Pearish S, Hostert L, Bell AM (2013) Behavioral type–environment correlations in the field: a study of three-spined stickleback. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:765–774PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Promislow DE, Harvey PH (1990) Living fast and dying young: a comparative analysis of life-history variation among mammals. J Zool 220:417–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pucek Z (1981) Keys to vertebrates of Poland, mammals. PWN – Polish Scientific Publishers, WarszawaGoogle Scholar
  52. Réale D, Reader SM, Sol D, McDougall PT, Dingemanse NJ (2007) Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biol Rev 82:291–318PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. Réale D, Garant D, Humphries MM, Bergeron P, Careau V, Montiglio P-O (2010) Personality and the emergence of the pace-of-life syndrome concept at the population level. Philos Trans R Soc B 365:4051–4063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ricklefs RE, Wikelski M (2002) The physiology/life-history nexus. Trends Ecol Evol 17:462–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Romero LM (2002) Seasonal changes in plasma glucocorticoid concentrations in free-living vertebrates. Gen Comp Endocrinol 128:1–24PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Rychlik L (1998) Evolution of social systems in shrews. In: Wojcik JM, Wolsan M (eds) Evolution of shrews. Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Białowieża, Poland, pp 347–406Google Scholar
  57. Rychlik L (2000) Habitat preferences of four sympatric species of shrews. Acta Theriol 45, Suppl. 1:173–190Google Scholar
  58. Rychlik L, Zwolak R (2005) Behavioural mechanisms of conflict avoidance among shrews. Acta Theriol 50:289–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rychlik L, Zwolak R (2006) Interspecific aggression and behavioural dominance among four sympatric species of shrews. Can J Zool 84:434–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Santicchia F, Gagnaison C, Bisi F, Martinoli A, Matthysen E, Bertolino S, Wauters LA (2018) Habitat-dependent effects of personality on survival and reproduction in red squirrels. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Semlitsch RD, Gibbons JW (1988) Fish predation in size-structured populations of treefrog tadpoles. Oecologia 75:321–326PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Sih A, Bell A, Johnson JC (2004a) Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends Ecol Evol 19:372–378PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. Sih A, Bell AM, Johnson JC, Ziemba RE (2004b) Behavioral syndromes: an integrative overview. Q Rev Biol 79:241–277PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. Sih A, Mathot KJ, Moirón M, Montiglio P-O, Wolf M, Dingemanse NJ (2015) Animal personality and state–behaviour feedbacks: a review and guide for empiricists. Trends Ecol Evol 30:50–60PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. Sol D, Maspons J, Gonzalez-Voyer A, Morales-Castilla I, Garamszegi LZ, Møller AP (2018) Risk-taking behavior, urbanization and the pace of life in birds. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Spiegel O, Leu ST, Sih A, Godfrey SS, Bull CM (2015) When the going gets tough: behavioural type-dependent space use in the sleepy lizard changes as the season dries. Proc R Soc B 282:20151768PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Stamps JA (2007) Growth-mortality tradeoffs and ‘personality traits’ in animals. Ecol Lett 10:355–363PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Stearns SC (1989) Trade-offs in life-history evolution. Funct Ecol 3:259–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Strauss A, Mascher E, Palme R, Millesi E (2007) Sexually mature and immature yearling male European ground squirrels: a comparison of behavioral and physiological parameters. Horm Behav 52:646–652PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. Tapisso JT, Ramalhinho MG, Mathias ML, Rychlik L (2013) Ecological release: swimming and diving behavior of an allopatric population of the Mediterranean water shrew. J Mammal 94:29–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Taylor L (1961) Aggregation, variance and the mean. Nature 189:732–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Taylor JRE (1998) Evolution of energetic strategies in shrews. In: Wojcik JM, Wolsan M (eds) Evolution of shrews. Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Białowieża, Poland, pp 309–346Google Scholar
  73. Verbeek ME, Drent PJ, Wiepkema PR (1994) Consistent individual differences in early exploratory behaviour of male great tits. Anim Behav 48:1113–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. von Merten S, Zwolak R, Rychlik L (2017) Social personality: a more social shrew species exhibits stronger differences in personality types. Anim Behav 127:125–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Westneat DF, Wright J, Dingemanse NJ (2015) The biology hidden inside residual within-individual phenotypic variation. Biol Rev 90:729–743PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. Wiersma P, Muñoz-Garcia A, Walker A, Williams JB (2007) Tropical birds have a slow pace of life. P Natl Acad Sci USA 104:9340–9345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Wilson DS (1998) Adaptive individual differences within single populations. Philos Trans R Soc B 353:199–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Wolf M, Weissing FJ (2012) Animal personalities: consequences for ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 27:452–461PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. Wolf M, van Doorn GS, Leimar O, Weissing FJ (2007) Life-history trade-offs favour the evolution of animal personalities. Nature 447:581–585PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  80. Wright J, Bolstad GH, Araya-Ajoy YG, Dingemanse NJ (2019) Life-history evolution under fluctuating density-dependent selection and the adaptive alignment of pace-of-life syndromes. Biol Rev 94:230–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Systematic ZoologyInstitute of Environmental Biology, Adam Mickiewicz UniversityPoznańPoland
  2. 2.CESAM–Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies, Department of Animal Biology, Faculty of SciencesUniversity of LisbonLisbonPortugal
  3. 3.Behavioural Ecology, Department of BiologyLudwig-Maximilians University of MunichPlaneggGermany

Personalised recommendations