Literature DB >> 15891833

Do lizards and snakes really differ in their ability to take large prey? A study of relative prey mass and feeding tactics in lizards.

Richard Shine1, Jai Thomas.   

Abstract

Adaptations of snakes to overpower and ingest relatively large prey have attracted considerable research, whereas lizards generally are regarded as unable to subdue or ingest such large prey items. Our data challenge this assumption. On morphological grounds, most lizards lack the highly kinetic skulls that facilitate prey ingestion in macrostomate snakes, but (1) are capable of reducing large items into ingestible-sized pieces, and (2) have much larger heads relative to body length than do snakes. Thus, maximum ingestible prey size might be as high in some lizards as in snakes. Also, the willingness of lizards to tackle very large prey items may have been underestimated. Captive hatchling scincid lizards (Bassiana duperreyi) offered crickets of a range of relative prey masses (RPMs) attacked (and sometimes consumed parts of) crickets as large as or larger than their own body mass. RPM affected foraging responses: larger crickets were less likely to be attacked (especially on the abdomen), more likely to be avoided, and less likely to provide significant nutritional benefit to the predator. Nonetheless, lizards successfully attacked and consumed most crickets < or =35% of the predator's own body mass, representing RPM as high as for most prey taken by snakes. Thus, although lizards lack the impressive cranial kinesis or prey-subduction adaptations of snakes, at least some lizards are capable of overpowering and ingesting prey items as large as those consumed by snakes of similar body sizes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15891833     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-005-0074-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.298


  10 in total

Review 1.  Energetic and physiological correlates of prey handling and ingestion in lizards and snakes.

Authors:  A P Cruz-Neto; D V Andrade; A S Abe
Journal:  Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.320

2.  Phylogenetic relationships of the dwarf boas and a comparison of Bayesian and bootstrap measures of phylogenetic support.

Authors:  Thomas P Wilcox; Derrick J Zwickl; Tracy A Heath; David M Hillis
Journal:  Mol Phylogenet Evol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.286

3.  Sexual dimorphism in lizard body shape: the roles of sexual selection and fecundity selection.

Authors:  Mats Olsson; Richard Shine; Erik Wapstra; Beata Uivari; Thomas Madsen
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 3.694

4.  Animal foraging: past, present and future.

Authors:  G Perry; E R Pianka
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 17.712

5.  Experimental evidence of an age-specific shift in chemical detection of predators in a lizard.

Authors:  Megan L Head; J Scott Keogh; Paul Doughty
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.626

6.  Density-dependent changes in individual foraging specialization of largemouth bass.

Authors:  D E Schindler; James R Hodgson; James F Kitchell
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Effects of body mass, meal size, fast length, and temperature on specific dynamic action in the timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus).

Authors:  Frederic Zaidan; Steven J Beaupre
Journal:  Physiol Biochem Zool       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.247

8.  Functional implications of supercontracting muscle in the chameleon tongue retractors.

Authors:  A Herrel; J J Meyers; P Aerts; K C Nishikawa
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.312

9.  Cranial kinesis in gekkonid lizards

Authors: 
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 3.312

10.  Cranial kinesis in geckoes: functional implications.

Authors:  A Herrel; P Aerts; F De Vree
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 3.312

  10 in total
  1 in total

1.  Temperate snake community in South America: is diet determined by phylogeny or ecology?

Authors:  Gisela P Bellini; Alejandro R Giraudo; Vanesa Arzamendia; Eduardo G Etchepare
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.