Behavioral and respiratory responses to stressors in multiple populations of three-spined sticklebacks that differ in predation pressure
- 555 Downloads
Individual animals of the same species inhabiting environments which differ in the frequency and magnitude of stressors often exhibit different physiological and behavioral responses to stressors. Here, we compare the respiratory response to confinement stress, and behavioral responses to ecologically relevant challenges among sticklebacks from 11 different populations varying in predation pressure. We found that sticklebacks from high predation populations breathed faster in response to confinement stress and were, on an average, more behaviorally responsive to a pike behind glass compared with sticklebacks from low predation populations. These patterns differ from the results of studies on other species, highlighting the need for a conceptual framework to understand the proximate and ultimate factors shaping variable responses to stressors over developmental and evolutionary time. Moreover, physiological and behavioral responses were integrated with each other, both at the individual and population levels. In general, fish that were more aggressive and bold in the presence of a predator breathed faster, independent of body size. These results are consistent with the growing body of evidence that individuals differ in a suite of physiological and behavioral mechanisms for coping with challenges in the environment.
KeywordsAggression Antipredator behavior Behavioral syndrome Geographic variation Personality Ventilation rate
We thank Stuart Wilson, David Alvarez, Susie Coyle, John Laurie and Kate Arnold for help with the fish, and to Andy Young for catching the pike. Funding was provided by a US National Science Foundation International Postdoctoral Research Fellowship to AMB. We are also grateful to the many landowners who allowed us to collect fish on their property.
- Bell MA, Foster SA (1994) The evolutionary biology of the threespine stickleback. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Bell MA, Aguirre WE, Buck NJ (2004) Twelve years of contemporary armor evolution in a threespine stickleback population. Evol Int J Org Evol 58:814–824Google Scholar
- Hik DS, McColl CJ, Boonstra R (2001) Why are Arctic ground squirrels more stressed in the boreal forest than in alpine meadows? Ecoscience 8:275–288Google Scholar
- Huntingford FA, Wright PJ, Tierney JF (1994) Adaptive variation and antipredator behaviour in threespine stickleback. In: Bell MA, Foster SA (eds) The evolutionary biology of the threespine stickleback. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 277–295Google Scholar
- Lessells CM, Boag PT (1987) Unrepeatable repeatabilities: a common mistake. Auk 104:116–121Google Scholar
- Mangel M, Stamps J (2001) Trade-offs between growth and mortality and the maintenance of individual variation in growth. Evol Ecol Res 3:583–593Google Scholar
- Priede IG (1985) Metabolic scope in fishes. In: Tytler P, Calow P (eds) Fish energetics: new perspectives. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 33–64Google Scholar
- Reimchen TE (1994) Predators and morphological evolution in threespine stickleback. In: Bell MA, Foster SA (eds) The evolutionary biology of the threespine stickleback. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 240–273Google Scholar
- Rice WR (1989) Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evol Int J Org Evol 43:223–225Google Scholar
- Zar JH (1999) Biostatistical analysis, 4th edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar