Literature DB >> 25865135

Individual differences in behavioural plasticities.

Judy A Stamps1.   

Abstract

Interest in individual differences in animal behavioural plasticities has surged in recent years, but research in this area has been hampered by semantic confusion as different investigators use the same terms (e.g. plasticity, flexibility, responsiveness) to refer to different phenomena. The first goal of this review is to suggest a framework for categorizing the many different types of behavioural plasticities, describe examples of each, and indicate why using reversibility as a criterion for categorizing behavioural plasticities is problematic. This framework is then used to address a number of timely questions about individual differences in behavioural plasticities. One set of questions concerns the experimental designs that can be used to study individual differences in various types of behavioural plasticities. Although within-individual designs are the default option for empirical studies of many types of behavioural plasticities, in some situations (e.g. when experience at an early age affects the behaviour expressed at subsequent ages), 'replicate individual' designs can provide useful insights into individual differences in behavioural plasticities. To date, researchers using within-individual and replicate individual designs have documented individual differences in all of the major categories of behavioural plasticities described herein. Another important question is whether and how different types of behavioural plasticities are related to one another. Currently there is empirical evidence that many behavioural plasticities [e.g. contextual plasticity, learning rates, IIV (intra-individual variability), endogenous plasticities, ontogenetic plasticities) can themselves vary as a function of experiences earlier in life, that is, many types of behavioural plasticity are themselves developmentally plastic. These findings support the assumption that differences among individuals in prior experiences may contribute to individual differences in behavioural plasticities observed at a given age. Several authors have predicted correlations across individuals between different types of behavioural plasticities, i.e. that some individuals will be generally more plastic than others. However, empirical support for most of these predictions, including indirect evidence from studies of relationships between personality traits and plasticities, is currently sparse and equivocal. The final section of this review suggests how an appreciation of the similarities and differences between different types of behavioural plasticities may help theoreticians formulate testable models to explain the evolution of individual differences in behavioural plasticities and the evolutionary and ecological consequences of individual differences in behavioural plasticities.
© 2015 Cambridge Philosophical Society.

Keywords:  IIV; contextual plasticity; developmental plasticity; flexibility; learning; life-cycle staging; ontogenetic plasticity; potential plasticity; realized plasticity; temporal plasticity

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25865135     DOI: 10.1111/brv.12186

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc        ISSN: 0006-3231


  37 in total

1.  Morph-specific artificial selection reveals a constraint on the evolution of polyphenisms.

Authors:  Bruno A Buzatto; Huon L Clark; Joseph L Tomkins
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Association of Ovarian Tumor β2-Adrenergic Receptor Status with Ovarian Cancer Risk Factors and Survival.

Authors:  Tianyi Huang; Shelley S Tworoger; Jonathan L Hecht; Megan S Rice; Anil K Sood; Laura D Kubzansky; Elizabeth M Poole
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 3.  Two sides of a coin: ecological and chronobiological perspectives of timing in the wild.

Authors:  Barbara Helm; Marcel E Visser; William Schwartz; Noga Kronfeld-Schor; Menno Gerkema; Theunis Piersma; Guy Bloch
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Dietary L-tryptophan modulates agonistic behavior and brain serotonin in male dyadic contests of a cichlid fish.

Authors:  L Morandini; M R Ramallo; M F Scaia; C Höcht; G M Somoza; M Pandolfi
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 1.836

5.  The Mind-Body Study: study design and reproducibility and interrelationships of psychosocial factors in the Nurses' Health Study II.

Authors:  Tianyi Huang; Claudia Trudel-Fitzgerald; Elizabeth M Poole; Sherylin Sawyer; Laura D Kubzansky; Susan E Hankinson; Olivia I Okereke; Shelley S Tworoger
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2019-05-02       Impact factor: 2.506

6.  Testing the predictions of coping styles theory in threespined sticklebacks.

Authors:  Miles K Bensky; Ryan Paitz; Laura Pereira; Alison M Bell
Journal:  Behav Processes       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 1.777

7.  Is behavioural plasticity consistent across different environmental gradients and through time?

Authors:  David J Mitchell; Peter A Biro
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Roll with the fear: environment and state dependence of pill bug (Armadillidium vulgare) personalities.

Authors:  Gergely Horváth; László Zsolt Garamszegi; Judit Bereczki; Tamás János Urszán; Gergely Balázs; Gábor Herczeg
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2019-02-07

9.  Genotype-by-genotype epistasis for exploratory behaviour in D. simulans.

Authors:  Allison Jaffe; Madeline P Burns; Julia B Saltz
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2020-06-10       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Neural Fingerprints Underlying Individual Language Learning Profiles.

Authors:  Gangyi Feng; Jinghua Ou; Zhenzhong Gan; Xiaoyan Jia; Danting Meng; Suiping Wang; Patrick C M Wong
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-22       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.