Search for: All records

Host behavior and parasite infection reciprocally interact, but this dynamic is rarely studied experimentally in the field with multiple behaviors. We investigated the interplay between parasitism and host behavior via an in situ experimental tick infestation of a wild population of sleepy lizards, Tiliqua rugosa. Using Bayesian models, we assessed the relationship between experimental infestation and lizard aggression and boldness before and after infestation. First, we tested whether lizard aggression and boldness prior to infestation predicted the probability of tick attachment in the infestation experiment. Second, we evaluated whether experimental infestation affected subsequent lizard aggression and boldness. We found that aggression and boldness related interactively with infestation: for unaggressive lizards, higher boldness was associated with reduced experimental infestation success, but the opposite occurred for aggressive individuals. Second, increased tick infestation did not affect post-infestation aggression, but tended to increase boldness. Taken together, these results highlight the potential for feedbacks between parasites and multi-dimensional host behaviors.

Social relationships among animals emerge from interactions in multiple ecological and social situations. However, we seldom ask how each situation contributes to the global structure of a population, and whether different situations contribute different information about social relationships and the position of individuals within the social fabric. Griffon vultures (Gyps fulvus) interact socially in multiple situations, including communal roosting, joint flights, and co‐feeding. These social interactions can influence population‐level outcomes, such as disease transmission and information sharing that determine survival and response to changes. We examined the unique contribution of each social and ecological situation to the social structure of the population and individuals' positions within the overall social network using high‐resolution GPS tracking. We found that the number of individuals each vulture interacted with (degree) was best predicted by diurnal interactions—both during flights and on the ground (such as when feeding). However, the strength of social bonds, that is, the number of interactions an individual had (strength), was best predicted by interactions on the ground—both during the day (e.g., while feeding) and at night (e.g., while roosting) but not by interactions while flying. Thus, social situations differ in their impact on the relationships that individuals form. By incorporating the ecological situations in which social interactions occur we gain a more complete view of how social relationships are formed and which situations are important for different types of interactions.

Spatial and social behaviour are fundamental aspects of an animal's biology, and their social and spatial environments are indelibly linked through mutual causes and shared consequences. We define the ‘spatial–social interface’ as intersection of social and spatial aspects of individuals' phenotypes and environments. Behavioural variation at the spatial–social interface has implications for ecological and evolutionary processes including pathogen transmission, population dynamics, and the evolution of social systems. We link spatial and social processes through a foundation of shared theory, vocabulary, and methods. We provide examples and future directions for the integration of spatial and social behaviour and environments. We introduce key concepts and approaches that either implicitly or explicitly integrate social and spatial processes, for example, graph theory, density‐dependent habitat selection, and niche specialization. Finally, we discuss how movement ecology helps link the spatial–social interface. Our review integrates social and spatial behavioural ecology and identifies testable hypotheses at the spatial–social interface.

COVID-19 lockdowns in early 2020 reduced human mobility, providing an opportunity to disentangle its effects on animals from those of landscape modifications. Using GPS data, we compared movements and road avoidance of 2300 terrestrial mammals (43 species) during the lockdowns to the same period in 2019. Individual responses were variable with no change in average movements or road avoidance behavior, likely due to variable lockdown conditions. However, under strict lockdowns 10-day 95th percentile displacements increased by 73%, suggesting increased landscape permeability. Animals’ 1-hour 95th percentile displacements declined by 12% and animals were 36% closer to roads in areas of high human footprint, indicating reduced avoidance during lockdowns. Overall, lockdowns rapidly altered some spatial behaviors, highlighting variable but substantial impacts of human mobility on wildlife worldwide.

Individual variation in movement is profoundly important for fitness and offers key insights into the spatial and temporal dynamics of populations and communities. Nonetheless, individual variation in fine‐scale movement behaviours is rarely examined even though animal tracking devices offer the long‐term, high‐resolution, repeatable data in natural conditions that are ideal for studying this variation. Furthermore, of the few studies that consider individual variation in movement, even fewer also consider the internal traits and environmental factors that drive movement behaviour which are necessary for contextualising individual differences in movement patterns.

Animal movements are important drivers of nutrient redistribution that can affect primary productivity and biodiversity across various spatial scales. Recent work indicates that incorporating these movements into ecosystem models can enhance our ability to predict the spatio‐temporal distribution of nutrients. However, the role of animal behaviour in animal‐mediated nutrient transport (i.e. active subsidies) remains under‐explored. Here we review the current literature on active subsidies to show how the behaviour of active subsidy agents makes them both ecologically important and qualitatively distinct from abiotic processes (i.e. passive subsidies). We first propose that animal movement patterns can create similar ecological effects (i.e. press and pulse disturbances) in recipient ecosystems, which can be equal in magnitude to or greater than those of passive subsidies. We then highlight three key behavioural features distinguishing active subsidies. First, organisms can transport nutrients counter‐directionally to abiotic forces and potential energy gradients (e.g. upstream). Second, unlike passive subsidies, organisms respond to the patterns of nutrients that they generate. Third, animal agents interact with each other. The latter two features can form positive‐ or negative‐feedback loops, creating patterns in space or time that can reinforce nutrient hotspots in places of mass aggregations and/or create lasting impacts within ecosystems. Because human‐driven changes can affect both the space‐use of active subsidy species and their composition at both population (i.e. individual variation) and community levels (i.e. species interactions), predicting patterns in nutrient flows under future modified environmental conditions depends on understanding the behavioural mechanisms that underlie active subsidies and variation among agents' contributions. We conclude by advocating for the integration of animal behaviour, animal movement data, and individual variation into future conservation efforts in order to provide more accurate and realistic assessments of changing ecosystem function.

Ecologists have long been interested in linking individual behaviour with higher level processes. For motile species, this ‘upscaling’ is governed by how well any given movement strategy maximizes encounters with positive factors and minimizes encounters with negative factors. Despite the importance of encounter events for a broad range of ecological processes, encounter theory has not kept pace with developments in animal tracking or movement modelling. Furthermore, existing work has focused primarily on the relationship between animal movement and encounterrateswhile the relationship between individual movement and the spatiallocationsof encounter events in the environment has remained conspicuously understudied.