↓ Skip to main content

Foraging syndromes and trait variation in antlions along a climatic gradient

Overview of attention for article published in Oecologia, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Foraging syndromes and trait variation in antlions along a climatic gradient
Published in
Oecologia, March 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00442-015-3284-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yehonatan Alcalay, Inon Scharf, Ofer Ovadia

Abstract

Behavioral syndromes arise when individual behavior is correlated over time and/or across environmental contexts, often resulting in inter-population behavioral differences. Three main hypotheses have been suggested to explain the evolution of behavioral syndromes. The constraint hypothesis suggests that behaviors originate from a shared mechanism with a strong genetic or physiological basis. In contrast, according to the adaptive hypothesis, behavioral syndromes depend on specific selective pressures in each environment, and thus should evolve when specific behavioral combinations are advantageous. Finally, behavioral syndromes can also arise owing to neutral stochastic processes. We tested here for variation in the foraging syndromes of pit-building antlions originating from different populations along a climatic gradient. Although inter-population variation existed in some traits, foraging syndromes were similar across populations, supporting the constraint hypothesis. These findings suggest that stabilizing selection, acting on the foraging behavior of antlions during their larval phase, outweighs local selection pressures, resulting in "constraint syndromes." We also explored behavioral repeatability of foraging-related traits within and among habitats (natural, novel and disturbed habitats), and detected different levels of repeatability: pit diameter was more repeatable than response time to prey, followed by prey exploitation efficiency. Behavioral repeatability of the same trait differed according to context, suggesting that repeatability is a trait in itself and should not be considered identical even when studying the same behavioral trait.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Mexico 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 37 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Researcher 5 12%
Other 4 10%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 55%
Environmental Science 6 14%
Psychology 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 8 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,264,045
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from Oecologia
#3,983
of 4,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,475
of 260,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oecologia
#77
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 260,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.