Author
Listed:
- Adam Cisterne
- Eric P. Vanderduys
- David A. Pike
- Lin Schwarzkopf
Abstract
The ability to detect and avoid potential predators can enhance fitness, but also has costs, and thus many animals respond to potential predators either in a general (avoid all potential predators) or threat-sensitive (selectively avoid dangerous predators) manner. We used 2-choice trials to investigate strategies used by globally invasive house geckos (Hemidactylus frenatus) and native Australian house geckos (Gehyra dubia) to avoid chemical cues from potential snake predators (Acanthophis antarcticus, Antaresia maculosa, Boiga irregularis, and Pseudechis colletti). Invasive geckos did not respond to a novel chemical cue (perfume), but significantly avoided shelters scented by all 4 predatory snake species, and did not discriminate among snake species that occurred within or outside their current geographic range. Thus, the invasive gecko showed generalized predator avoidance. In contrast, native geckos avoided shelters scented with perfume but did not avoid shelters scented by any of the 4 predatory snake species. We interpret the lack of response by native geckos as threat sensitive, suggesting that they may require additional cues beyond scent alone (e.g., visual cues) to judge the situation as threatening. Generalized responses may be costly for native species living in native habitats filled with predators but may facilitate the rapid establishment of invasive species in novel (especially urban) environments, where general responses to predators may have relatively low costs and enhance survival.
Suggested Citation
Adam Cisterne & Eric P. Vanderduys & David A. Pike & Lin Schwarzkopf, 2014.
"Wary invaders and clever natives: sympatric house geckos show disparate responses to predator scent,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(3), pages 604-611.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:25:y:2014:i:3:p:604-611.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:25:y:2014:i:3:p:604-611.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.