Animal personality: a comparison of standardized assays and focal observations in North American red squirrels
Animal personality: a comparison of standardized assays and focal observations in North American red squirrels
复制标题
动物性格：北美红松鼠标准化测定和焦点观察的比较
DOI：
10.1016/j.anbehav.2022.05.012
复制
发表时间：
2022
期刊：
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Boutin, S.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Martinig, A.R.;Karst, H.J.;Siracusa, E.R.;Studd, E.K.;McAdam, A.G.;Dantzer, B.;Delaney, D.M.;Lane, J.E.;Pokharel, P.;Boutin, S.
重点我们评估了分析和焦点观察是否测量了相似的行为轴。分析捕获了与运动和对抗行为相关的行为。焦点捕获了与领土和警惕/进食相关的行为。我们发现方法之间没有个体相关性。分析仍然是通过控制环境来测量个性的主要方法。随着对动物个性研究的兴趣越来越大，量化行为中一致的个体差异的方法正在扩大。量化动物个性的两种最常见的方法是标准化行为测定和焦点动物采样。我们评估了是否检测和焦点提供了类似的动物性格措施，在野生种群的自由放养的北美红松鼠，Tamiasciurus hudsonicus，通过比较方法之间的性状的个体相关性。分析描述了两个行为轴-一个与运动行为相关，另一个与对同种的对抗行为相关。焦点描述了两个额外的行为轴-一个与运动和领土行为相关，另一个与警惕和进食行为之间的权衡相关。虽然我们发现的证据表明，高性状重复性的行为轴测定，无论是焦点行为轴低性状重复性是否在社会环境中的个体差异进行控制（即占“伪人格”）。我们还发现，检测和焦点行为轴之间没有个体相关性。方法之间缺乏相关性可能是因为方法之间变异的主导轴不同，或者是因为高行为可塑性导致的焦点性状重复性低。鉴于此，我们得出结论，测定可能仍然是衡量一致的个体行为差异的支柱，因为它们有能力标准化环境条件。
HighlightsWe evaluated whether assay and focal observations measure similar behavioural axes.Assays captured behaviours associated with movement and antagonistic behaviour.Focals captured behaviours associated with territoriality and vigilance/feeding.We found no among-individual correlations between methodologies.Assays remain the mainstay for measuring personality by controlling for environment.As interest in animal personality research grows, methodologies for quantifying consistent among-individual differences in behaviour are expanding. Two of the most common methods for quantifying animal personality are standardized behavioural assays and focal animal sampling. We evaluated whether assays and focals provided similar animal personality measures in a wild population of free-ranging North American red squirrels, Tamiasciurus hudsonicus, by comparing the among-individual correlations of traits between methods. Assays described two behavioural axes—one associated with movement behaviours and another associated with antagonistic behaviours towards conspecifics. Focals described two additional behavioural axes—one associated with movement and territorial behaviours, and another associated with the trade-off between vigilant and feeding behaviours. Although we found evidence of high trait repeatability for behavioural axes measured with assays, both focal behavioural axes had low trait repeatability regardless of whether among-individual differences in the social environment were controlled for (ie to account for ‘pseudopersonality’). We also found no among-individual correlations between assay and focal behavioural axes. The lack of correlation between methods may be because the dominant axes of variation differ between methods or because of the low trait repeatability of focals due to high behavioural plasticity. Given this, we conclude that assays will likely remain the mainstay for measuring consistent among-individual differences in behaviour given their ability to standardize for environmental conditions.