↓ Skip to main content

Individual variation in functional response parameters is explained by body size but not by behavioural types in a poeciliid fish

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
Individual variation in functional response parameters is explained by body size but not by behavioural types in a poeciliid fish
Published in
Oecologia, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00442-016-3701-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arne Schröder, Gregor Kalinkat, Robert Arlinghaus

Abstract

Functional responses are per-capita feeding rate models whose parameters often scale with individual body size but the parameters may also be further influenced by behavioural traits consistently differing among individuals, i.e. behavioural types or animal personalities. Behavioural types may intrinsically lead to lower feeding rates when consistently shy, inactive and easily stressed individuals cannot identify or respond to risk-free environments or need less food due to lower metabolic rates linked to behaviour. To test how much variation in functional response parameters is explained by body size and how much by behavioural types, we estimated attack rate and handling time individually for differently sized female least killifish (Heterandria formosa) and repeatedly measured behavioural traits for each individual. We found that individual fish varied substantially in their attack rate and in their handling time. Behavioural traits were stable over time and varied consistently among individuals along two distinct personality axes. The individual variation in functional responses was explained solely by body size, and contrary to our expectations, not additionally by the existing behavioural types in exploration activity and coping style. While behavioural trait-dependent functional responses may offer a route to the understanding of the food web level consequences of behavioural types, our study is so far only the second one on this topic. Importantly, our results indicate in contrast to that previous study that behavioural types do not per se affect individual functional responses assessed in the absence of external biotic stressors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 75 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 21%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 10 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 43 56%
Environmental Science 12 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Neuroscience 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 18 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2018.
All research outputs
#4,436,389
of 24,778,793 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#842
of 4,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,218
of 363,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#13
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,778,793 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,412 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 363,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.