Large-scale patterns of signal evolution: an interspecific study of Liolaemus lizard headbob displays

Martins, Emı́lia P.; Labra, Antonieta; Halloy, Monique; Thompson, Julie T.

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.08.026

Cited by 62 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparative studies of the socialchemical recognition in Liolaemus with inclusion of more species that do not cohabit with congeners can give important insights about the evolution of chemical communication in lizards and other taxa. Moreover, if these Table 1 Results of two-way ANOVAs, testing for effects of season (pre-and post-hibernation), treatment (own, same-sex, and opposite-sex enclosure), and their interaction on three response variables, recorded in Liolaemus fitzgeraldi studies incorporate measurements of visual communication, we can have significant insights about a potential trade-off between visual and chemical communication (e.g., Martins et al 2004). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemical self-recognition in the lizard Liolaemus fitzgeraldi

Aguilar

Labra

Niemeyer

2008

J Ethol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social-chemical recognition is exhibited by all the Liolaemus lizards tested to date, except Liolaemus fitzgeraldi, which during post-hibernation did not discriminate chemosignals of same-sex individuals from a control. To clarify if L. fitzgeraldi is unique among the studied Liolaemus in lacking social-chemical recognition or if this was previously undetected, we recorded behavior during pre-and post-hibernation when confronted with chemosignals of conspecifics and from themselves. L fitzgeraldi showed self-recognition and seasonal changes in two exploratory behaviors. Potentially, conspecific recognition in L fitzgeraldi was undetected due to seasonality, but this species may rely comparatively less on chemical communication than congeners.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemical self-recognition in the lizard Liolaemus fitzgeraldi

Aguilar

Labra

Niemeyer

2008

J Ethol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For both sexes most displays are simple push-ups with head-bobbing, as seen for a wide diversity of lizard species from other continents and other phylogenetic lineages (Jenssen 1977;McMann 1993;Martins 1991Martins , 1993Martins and Lamont 1998;Watt and Joss 2003;Martins et al 2004). These movements are usually performed when the lizards are solitary, and thus function as non-directed displays; we discuss their possible significance below.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

The language of lizards: interpreting the function of visual displays of the Indian rock lizard, Psammophilus dorsalis (Agamidae)

Radder

Saidapur

Shine

et al. 2006

J Ethol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The first step in understanding any communication system is to document signal diversity relative to the context of signalling (e.g. sex of the signaller and audience). Observation of 30 free-ranging rock lizards (Psammophilus dorsalis) on rock outcrops in southern India over a period of 18 months revealed that these lizards produce a complex array of ritualized signals involving push-ups (headbobbing), dorsal flattening, extension of the legs or gular region, and tail-raising. Push-ups were performed by both sexes, usually after moving from one location to another. Push-ups were rarely accompanied by other postural modifications, and seem to function as non-directed signals. Dorsal flattening was elicited by birds flying overhead, and seems to make the lizard less conspicuous to predators. There was, nonetheless, a strong sex difference in the frequency of this behaviour, because the habitats used by males (open rocks) exposed them to more birds. Males displayed to females by extending their gular folds and arching their backs; other animals (e.g. squirrels, monkeys) also elicited the latter posture from both sexes. Leg extension was observed for both males and females, but in different contexts -males in response to conspecifics, females in response to other animals. Females raised their tails in response to encountering a male. Thus, these lizards have a complex repertoire of postures for predator evasion, for interaction with other species and with conspecifics, and for communicating sex-specific social information about gender (tail-raise) or dominance status (gular extension, leg extension).

show abstract

“…ms. ; see also Garland et al 1993;Butler et al 2000;Martins et al 2004;Ord and Martins 2006 for use of Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes to model residual variance). A simplified version of the method, allowing only a single shift in the optimum, can also be fit with the software package COMPARE (Martins 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The OUCH program (Butler and King 2004) has increased use of the adaptation-inertia method (Hansen 1997;Hansen et al 2000;Butler and King 2004;Valiente-Banuet et al 2006;Verdu and Gleiser 2006;Gomez and Thery 2007;Hipp 2007;Whittall and Hodges 2007; Labra et al, unpubl. ms.; see also Garland et al 1993;Butler et al 2000;Martins et al 2004;Ord and Martins 2006 for use of Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes to model residual variance). A simplified version of the method, allowing only a single shift in the optimum, can also be fit with the software package COMPARE (Martins 2004).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Method for Studying Adaptation to a Randomly Evolving Environment

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most phylogenetic comparative methods used for testing adaptive hypotheses make evolutionary assumptions that are not compatible with evolution toward an optimal state. As a consequence they do not correct for maladaptation. The "evolutionary regression" that is returned is more shallow than the optimal relationship between the trait and environment. We show how both evolutionary and optimal regressions, as well as phylogenetic inertia, can be estimated jointly by a comparative method built around an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck model of adaptive evolution. The method considers a single trait adapting to an optimum that is influenced by one or more continuous, randomly changing predictor variables.KEY WORDS: Adaptation, maladaptation, optimality, Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, phylogenetic comparative method, phylogenetic effect, phylogenetic inertia.Optimality models and other adaptive hypotheses are often tested by comparing their predictions to the trait values of species in different environments (e.g., Ridley 1983;Harvey and Pagel 1991). Most comparative methods are, however, based on models that are inconsistent with evolution toward an optimum. For example, the method of independent contrasts makes the assumption that traits evolve according to a Brownian-motion process (Felsenstein 1985), but if evolution is governed by this process, the expected trait value of a descendant species must equal the trait value of its ancestor, and there can be no systematic evolution toward an optimal state. If the ancestral species' trait value does not match the optimum, then the trait value of the descendant species is not expected to match it any better. Hansen and Orzack (2005) 4 Current address: Department of Zoology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 called this the problem of inherited maladaptation. A multivariate Brownian-motion process can be used to represent correlated evolutionary changes in two or more traits, but correlated evolution is not equivalent to adaptive evolution. For example, suppose we predict that the optimal relation between two traits, x and y, is y = x. This simple prediction is incompatible with evolution as a Brownian-motion process. Even if there is a positive correlation between changes in y and x, any deviation from the 1:1 line will be inherited by the descendant species and there will be no systematic tendency to evolve toward the predicted relationship.This lack of attention to the fundamental nature of adaptive evolution has influenced the application of phylogenetic comparative methods. Such methods are often used erroneously to "correct" for phylogeny when they should only correct for the residual effects of phylogeny that remain after adaptation has been accounted for. A phylogenetic signal in the data can arise both from the influence of ancestral character states due to a lag or inertia in adaptation to the current niche, and from the effects of adaptation to niche variables that are themselves phylogenetically structured. One should correct only for the former. Correcti...

show abstract

Large-scale patterns of signal evolution: an interspecific study of Liolaemus lizard headbob displays

Cited by 62 publications

References 46 publications

Chemical self-recognition in the lizard Liolaemus fitzgeraldi

Chemical self-recognition in the lizard Liolaemus fitzgeraldi

The language of lizards: interpreting the function of visual displays of the Indian rock lizard, Psammophilus dorsalis (Agamidae)

A Comparative Method for Studying Adaptation to a Randomly Evolving Environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About