Journal of Ethology

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 181–184 | Cite as

Chemical self-recognition in the lizard Liolaemus fitzgeraldi

  • Paz M. Aguilar
  • Antonieta Labra
  • Hermann M. Niemeyer
Short Communication


Social–chemical recognition is exhibited by all the Liolaemus lizards tested to date, except Liolaemus fitzgeraldi, which during post-hibernation did not discriminate chemosignals of same-sex individuals from a control. To clarify if L. fitzgeraldi is unique among the studied Liolaemus in lacking social–chemical recognition or if this was previously undetected, we recorded behavior during pre- and post-hibernation when confronted with chemosignals of conspecifics and from themselves. L fitzgeraldi showed self-recognition and seasonal changes in two exploratory behaviors. Potentially, conspecific recognition in L fitzgeraldi was undetected due to seasonality, but this species may rely comparatively less on chemical communication than congeners.


Chemosignals Liolaemus fitzgeraldi Tongue-flicks Behavioral exploration Seasonality 


  1. Alberts AC (1992) Pheromonal self-recognition in desert iguanas. Copeia 1992:22–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bull CM (2000) Monogamy in lizards. Behav Proc 51:7–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bull CM, Baghurst BC (1998) Home range overlap of mothers and their offspring in the sleepy lizard, Tiliqua rugosa. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 42:357–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butlin RK, Ritchie MG (1994) Behaviour and speciation. In: Slater PJB, Halliday TR (eds) Behaviour and evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 43–79Google Scholar
  5. Cooper WE Jr, Pérez-Mellado V (2002) Pheromonal discrimination of sex, reproductive condition, and species by the lacertid Podarcis hispanica. J Exp Zool 292:523–527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Donoso-Barros R (1966) Reptiles de Chile. Universidad de Chile, SantiagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Font E (1996) Los sentidos químicos de los reptiles. Un enfoque etológico. In: Colmenares F (ed) Psicología comparada y comportamiento animal. Síntesis, Madrid, pp 197–259Google Scholar
  8. Font E, Desfilis E (2002) Chemosensory recognition of familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics by juveniles of the Iberian wall lizard, Podarcis hispanica. Ethology 108:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Labra A (2006) Chemoreception and the assessment of fighting abilities in the lizard Liolaemus monticola. Ethology 112:993–999CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Labra A (2008) Multi-contextual use of chemical signal by Liolaemus lizards. In: Beynons RJ, Hurst JL, Roberts SC, Wyatt T (eds) Chemical signals in vertebrates XI. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 357–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Labra A, Niemeyer HM (1999) Intraspecific chemical recognition in the lizard Liolaemus tenuis. J Chem Ecol 25:1799–1811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Labra A, Niemeyer HM (2004) Variability in the assessment of snake predation risk by Liolaemus lizards. Ethology 110:649–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Labra A, Beltrán S, Niemeyer HM (2001a) Chemical exploratory behavior in the lizard Liolaemus bellii. J Herpetol 35:51–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Labra A, Escobar CA, Niemeyer HM (2001b) Chemical discrimination in Liolaemus lizards: comparison of behavioral and chemical data. In: Marchelewska-Koj A, Lepri JJ, Müller-Schwarze D (eds) Chemical signals in vertebrates IX. Kluwer/Plenum, New York, pp 439–444Google Scholar
  15. Labra A, Cortéz S, Niemeyer HM (2003) Age and season affect chemical discrimination of Liolaemus bellii own space. J Chem Ecol 29:2615–2620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lemaster MP, Mason RT (2002) Variation in a female sexual attractiveness pheromone controls male mate choice in garter snakes. J Chem Ecol 28:1269–1285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Martins MP, Labra A, Halloy M, Thompson JT (2004) Repeated large-scale patterns of signal evolution: an interspecific study of Liolaemus lizard headbob displays. Anim Behav 68:453–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Donnell RP, Ford NB, Shine R, Mason RT (2004) Male red-sided garter snakes, Thamnophis sirtalis parietalis, determine female mating status from pheromone trails. Anim Behav 68:677–683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Shine R, Phillips B, Waye H, LeMaster M, Mason RT (2003) Chemosensory cues allow courting male garter snakes to assess body length and body condition of potential mates. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:162–166Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Ethological Society and Springer 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paz M. Aguilar
    • 1
  • Antonieta Labra
    • 2
  • Hermann M. Niemeyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Ecología, Facultad de CienciasUniversidad de ChileSantiagoChile
  2. 2.Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis (CEES), Department of BiologyUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations