{"title":"Risk-sensitive foraging in a tropical lizard.","authors":"Avik Banerjee, Maria Thaker","doi":"10.1098/rsbl.2024.0628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Foraging opportunities can be unpredictable. When foragers face a choice between resources that vary in predictability, foraging decisions not only depend on the profitability of food but also on their physiological state. This risk-sensitive foraging approach, in which animals take greater foraging risks when starving, remains relatively untested in reptiles compared with other taxa. We tested the risk-sensitive foraging theory in the tropical lizard, <i>Psammophilus dorsalis</i>, by manipulating energy budgets (satiated versus 48 h starved) and measuring foraging preferences for options that differed in rewards: constant (two mealworms) versus variable (zero or four mealworms). We found that satiated lizards were risk averse to variability in reward amounts and chose the constant food option more frequently than the variable option. In contrast, starved lizards were risk-prone and chose the variable reward option more often than the constant one. At the end of foraging trials, these strategies resulted in both starved and satiated groups achieving similar net resource gains. As new support for risk-sensitive foraging in a tropical reptile species, these results provide insight into how resource uncertainty influences foraging strategies. For lizards in the tropics, which have high-energy requirements year-round, risk-sensitive foraging could be an effective strategy in stochastic environments.</p>","PeriodicalId":9005,"journal":{"name":"Biology Letters","volume":"21 2","pages":"20240628"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11835483/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology Letters","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2024.0628","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Foraging opportunities can be unpredictable. When foragers face a choice between resources that vary in predictability, foraging decisions not only depend on the profitability of food but also on their physiological state. This risk-sensitive foraging approach, in which animals take greater foraging risks when starving, remains relatively untested in reptiles compared with other taxa. We tested the risk-sensitive foraging theory in the tropical lizard, Psammophilus dorsalis, by manipulating energy budgets (satiated versus 48 h starved) and measuring foraging preferences for options that differed in rewards: constant (two mealworms) versus variable (zero or four mealworms). We found that satiated lizards were risk averse to variability in reward amounts and chose the constant food option more frequently than the variable option. In contrast, starved lizards were risk-prone and chose the variable reward option more often than the constant one. At the end of foraging trials, these strategies resulted in both starved and satiated groups achieving similar net resource gains. As new support for risk-sensitive foraging in a tropical reptile species, these results provide insight into how resource uncertainty influences foraging strategies. For lizards in the tropics, which have high-energy requirements year-round, risk-sensitive foraging could be an effective strategy in stochastic environments.
期刊介绍:
Previously a supplement to Proceedings B, and launched as an independent journal in 2005, Biology Letters is a primarily online, peer-reviewed journal that publishes short, high-quality articles, reviews and opinion pieces from across the biological sciences. The scope of Biology Letters is vast - publishing high-quality research in any area of the biological sciences. However, we have particular strengths in the biology, evolution and ecology of whole organisms. We also publish in other areas of biology, such as molecular ecology and evolution, environmental science, and phylogenetics.