Applying a quantitative genetics framework to behavioural syndrome research

Abstract

Current interest in behavioural syndromes, or 'animal personalities', reinforces a need for behavioural ecologists to adopt a multivariate view of phenotypes. Fortunately, many of the methodological and theoretical issues currently being dealt with by behavioural ecologists within the context of behavioural syndromes have previously been investigated by researchers in other areas of evolutionary ecology. As a result of these previous efforts, behavioural syndrome researchers have considerable theory and a wide range of tools already available to them. Here, we discuss aspects of quantitative genetics useful for understanding the multivariate phenotype as well as the relevance of quantitative genetics to behavioural syndrome research. These methods not only allow the proper characterization of the multivariate behavioural phenotype and genotypeincluding behaviours within, among and independent of behavioural syndrome structures-but also allow predictions as to how populations may respond to selection on behaviours within syndromes. An application of a quantitative genetics framework to behavioural syndrome research also clarifies and refines the questions that should be asked.

On between-individual and residual (co)variances in the study of animal personality: are you willing to take the “individual gambit”?

“…In addition to quantifying the between-individual correlation, it can accommodate interactions with the environment (plasticity), indirect effects between interacting individuals (social interactions), crosssex genetic correlations, and trade-offs; all of these are of interest to personality research and factors which shape the potential of a species' evolutionary capacity (Moore et al 1997;Bijma et al 2007;Roff and Fairbairn 2007;Sprenger et al 2012). The goal, even if challenging, should be to place behavioral ecology within the existing evolutionary framework (Dochtermann and Roff 2010). To get at these deeper levels, we need to start partitioning the phenotypic (co)variances whenever possible.…”

Better with your parasites? Lessons for behavioural ecology from evolved dependence and conditionally helpful parasites

“…We know that genetic variancesecovariances and, to a lesser extent, phenotypic correlation structure (integration) can drive or constrain evolutionary change (Dochtermann & Roff, 2010;Lande & Arnold, 1983) and influence the degree to which organisms are flexible/plastic in response to environmental change (Earley, Hanninen, Fuller, Garcia, & Lee, 2012;Ketterson et al, 2009;Schlichting, 1989). We also know that concentrations of some of the integrator molecules that are manipulated or otherwise affected by parasites exhibit heritable variation and, because these integrators often have pleiotropic effects, selection on integrator concentrations can drive wholesale changes to the phenotype and thus the variance upon which selection can act (Cox, McGlothlin, & Bonier, 2016).…”

Experimental evidence that adult antipredator behaviour is heritable and not influenced by behavioural copying in a wild bird

“…To appraise the evolution of behavioural consistencies, one key step is to gather knowledge on the heritability [9,14,15] as selection cannot affect the evolution and maintenance of behavioural consistencies unless they are heritable [16,17]. As total phenotypic variation in temperament among individuals could be owing to genetic, maternal and/or environmental factors, heritability analyses have to estimate their relative contributions.…”