Author
Listed:
- Luke S.C. McCowan
- Mark C. Mainwaring
- Nora H. Prior
- Simon C. Griffith
Abstract
Although personality has been well studied in a wide range of species, relatively few studies have assessed if behavior in standardized captive tests is predictive of behavior in the wild. We captured wild zebra finches around 2 breeding colonies and assayed their exploratory behavior with a novel environment test. The birds’ foraging behavior in the wild was also measured with the use of a passive integrated transponder tag system to monitor their use of feeders that were periodically moved around the colonies to assess exploratory behavior and sociality. During the same period, individuals’ reproductive success was monitored at the nest-boxes being used in this area. We found that our measures of sociality, wild, and captive exploration were repeatable, but contrary to our predictions, exploration in the novel environment test was not significantly correlated with exploration of feeders in the wild. We failed to find a predicted negative relationship between exploration and sociality, instead finding a significant positive correlation between exploration in the novel environment and sociality. Finally, we found little evidence that any of our measured personality traits influenced reproductive success at the colony, either individually or when the interactions between the personalities of both members of the pair were taken into account. The only exception was that highly exploratory males (assayed with wild feeder behavior) were more likely to make breeding attempts than less exploratory males. Our results suggest that researchers should use caution when using tests such as the classic novel environment test to make inferences about personality in wild populations.
Suggested Citation
Luke S.C. McCowan & Mark C. Mainwaring & Nora H. Prior & Simon C. Griffith, 2015.
"Personality in the wild zebra finch: exploration, sociality, and reproduction,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(3), pages 735-746.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:26:y:2015:i:3:p:735-746.
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:26:y:2015:i:3:p:735-746.. 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.