Olfactory recognition of predators by nocturnal lizards: Safety outweighs thermal benefits

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 72-77

  Webb, Jonathan K ^a   Pike, David A ^a   Shine, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Chemical communication; Predation risk; Predator; Reptile; Snake

Indexed keywords

AVOIDANCE REACTION; CHEMICAL CUE; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; LIZARD; NOCTURNAL ACTIVITY; OLFACTION; PREDATION RISK; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; RECOGNITION; SITE SELECTION; SNAKE;

GEKKONIDAE; HOPLOCEPHALUS BUNGAROIDES; OEDURA LESUEURII; REPTILIA; RHINOPLOCEPHALUS NIGRESCENS; SCINCIDAE; SERPENTES; SQUAMATA;

EID: 72649087784     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arp152     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Amo L, Lopez P, Martin J. 2004. Chemosensory recognition and behavioral responses of wall lizards, Podarcis muralis, to scents of snakes that pose different risks of predation. Copeia. 2004:691-696.
2. Andrewartha HG. 1961. Introduction to the study of animal populations. London: Methuen.
3. Apfelbach R, Blanchard CD, Blanchard RJ, Hayes RA, McGregor IS. 2005. The effects of predator odors in mammalian prey species: a review of field and laboratory studies. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 29:1123-1144.
4. Blumstein DT. 2006. The multipredator hypothesis and the evolutionary persistence of antipredator behavior. Ethology. 112: 209-217.
5. Brown GE. 2003. Learning about danger: chemical alarm cues and local risk assessment in prey fishes. Fish Fish (Oxford). 4:227-234.
6. Chivers DP, Mirza RS. 2001. Predator diet cues and the assessment of predation risk by aquatic vertebrates: a review and prospectus. New York: Plenum.
7. Chivers DP, Smith RJF. 1998. Chemical alarm signalling in aquatic predator-prey systems: a review and prospectus. Ecoscience. 5: 338-352.
8. Cogger HG. 2000. Reptiles and amphibians of Australia. 6th ed. Sydney (Australia): Reed Books.
9. Crews D, Garstka WR. 1982. The ecological physiology of a garter snake. Sci Am. 247:158-168.
10. Croak BM, Pike DA, Webb JK, Shine R. 2008. Three-dimensional crevice structure affects retreat site selection by reptiles. Anim Behav. 76:1875-1884.
11. Dial BE, Weldon PJ, Curtis B. 1989. Chemosensory identification of snake predators (Phyllorhynchus decurtatus) by banded geckos (Coleo-nyx variegatus). J Herpetol. 23:224-229.
12. Downes S. 2001. Trading heat and food for safety: costs of predator avoidance in a lizard. Ecology. 82:2870-2881.
13. Downes S, Shine R. 1998. Sedentary snakes and gullible geckos: predator-prey coevolution in nocturnal rock-dwelling reptiles. Anim Behav. 55:1373-1385.
14. Endler JA. 1986. Defense against predators. In: Feder M, Lauder G, editors. Predator-prey relationships perspectives and approaches from the study of lower vertebrates. Chicago (IL): The University of Chicago Press. p. 109-134.
15. Ferrari MCO, Trowell JJ, Brown GE, Chivers DP. 2005. The role of learning in the development of threat-sensitive predator avoidance by fathead minnows. Anim Behav. 70:777-784.
16. Head ML, Keogh JS, Doughty P. 2002. Experimental evidence of an age-specific shift in chemical detection of predators in a lizard. J Chem Ecol. 28:541-554.
17. Helfman GS. 1989. Threat-sensitive predator avoidance in damsel fish-trumpet fish interactions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 24:47-58.
18. Helfman GS, Winkelman DL. 1997. Threat sensitivity in bicolor dam-selfish: effects of sociality and body size. Ethology. 103:369-383.
19. Huey RB. 1991. Physiological consequences of habitat selection. Am Nat. 137:S91-S115.
20. Kats LB, Dill LM. 1998. The scent of death: Chemosensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. Ecoscience. 5:361-394.
21. Kearney M, Predavec M. 2000. Do nocturnal ectotherms thermoregu-late? A study of the temperate gecko Christinus marmoratus. Ecology. 81:2984-2996.
22. Krupa JJ, Sih A. 1998. Fishing spiders, green sunfish, and a stream-dwelling water strider:male-female conflict and prey responses to single versus multiple predator environments. Oecologia. 117: 258-265.
23. Langerhans RB, DeWitt TJ. 2002. Plasticity constrained: over-generalized induction cues cause maladaptive phenotypes. Evol Ecol Res. 4:857-870.
24. Lima SL. 1998. Stress and decision making under the risk of predation: recent developments from behavioural, reproductive, and ecological perspectives. Adv Study Behav. 27:215-290.
25. Lima SL, Dill LM. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool. 68:619-640.
26. Lloyd R, ALford RA, Schwarzkopf L. 2009. Chemical discrimination among predators by lizards:responses of three skink species to the odours of high and low-threat varanid predators. Austral Ecol. 34: 50-54.
27. Martin J, Lopez P. 1999. An experimental test of the costs of antipre-datory refuge use in the wall lizard, Podarcis muralis. Oikos. 84: 499-505.
28. McIntosh AR, Peckarsky BL. 1999. Criteria determining behavioural responses to multiple predators by a stream mayfly. Oikos. 85: 554-564.
29. Mirza RS, Ferrari MCO, Kiesecker JM, Chivers DP. 2006. Responses of American toad tadpoles to predation cues: behavioural response thresholds, threat-sensitivity and acquired predation recognition. Behaviour. 143:877-889.
30. Persons MH, Rypstra AL. 2001. Wolf spiders show graded antipredator behaviour in the presence of chemical cues from different sized predators. J Chem Ecol. 27:2493-2504.
31. Pringle RM, Webb JK, Shine R. 2003. Canopy structure, microclimate, and habitat selection by a nocturnal snake, Hoplocephalus bungar-oides. Ecology. 84:2668-2679.
32. Shine R. 1984. Reproductive biology and food habits of the Australian elapid snakes of the genus Cryptophis. J Herpetol. 18: 33-39.
33. Shine R, Webb JK, Fitzgerald M, Sumner J. 1998. The impact of bush-rock removal on an endangered snake species, Hoplocephalus bungar-oides (Serpentes: Elapidae). Wildl Res. 25:285-295.
34. Sih A, Englund G, Wooster D. 1998. Emergent impact of multiple predators on prey. Trends Ecol Evol. 13:350-355.
35. Speakman JR, Rydell J. 2000. Avoidance behaviour of bats and moths: when is it predator defence? Oikos. 88:221-223.
36. Stapley J. 2003. Differential avoidance of snake odours by a lizard: evidence for prioritized avoidance based on risk. Ethology. 109: 785-796.
37. Thoen C, Bauwens D, Verheyen RF. 1986. Chemoreception and behavioral responses of the common lizard Lacerta vivipara to snake chemical deposits. Anim Behav. 34:1805-1813.
38. Van Damme R, Bauwens D, Thoen C, Vanderstighlen D, Verheyen RF. 1995. Response of naive lizards to predator chemical cues. J Herpetol. 29:38-43.
39. Van Damme R, Quick K. 2001. Use of predator chemical cues by three species of lacertid lizards (Lacerta bedriagae, Podarcis tiliguerta, and Podarcis sicula). J Herpetol. 35:27-36.
40. Webb JK, Du WG, Pike DA, Shine R. 2009a. Chemical cues from both dangerous and non-dangerous snakes elicit antipredator behaviours from a nocturnal lizard. Anim Behav. 77:1471-1478.
41. Webb JK, Pringle RM, Shine R. 2009b. An intraguild predator influences microhabitat selection by juveniles of an endangered snake. Behav Ecol. 20:271-277.
42. Webb JK, Shine R. 1998a. Ecological characteristics of a threatened snake species, Hoplocephalus bungaroides (Serpentes, Elapidae). Anim Conserv. 1:185-193. (Pubitemid 128432838)
43. Webb JK, Shine R. 1998b. Thermoregulation by a nocturnal elapid snake (Hoplocephalus bungaroides) in southeastern Australia. Physiol Zool. 71:680-692.
44. Webb JK, Shine R. 1998c. Using thermal ecology to predict retreat-site selection by an endangered snake species. Biol Conserv. 86:233-242.
45. Weldon PJ. 1990. Responses by vertebrates to chemicals from predators. In: MacDonald DW, Muller-Schwarze D, Silverstein RM, editors. Chemical signals in vertebrates. New York: Plenum. p. 500-521.
46. Wisenden BD. 2000. Olfactory assessment of predation risk in the aquatic environment. Philos T R Soc B. 355:1205-1208.
47. Ylonen H, Wolff JO. 1999. Experiments in behavioural ecology and the real world. Trends Ecol Evol. 14:82.
48. Zhao X, Chivers DP. 2005. Response of juvenile goldfish (Carassius auratus) to chemical alarm cues: relationship between response intensity, response duration and the level of predation risk. In: Mason RT, LeMaster MP, Muller-Schwartze D, editors. Chemical signals in vertebrates. New York: Springer. p. 334-341.