A large-scale study across the avian clade identifies ecological drivers of neophobia.

IF 7.2 1区 生物学 Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
PLoS Biology Pub Date : 2025-10-14 eCollection Date: 2025-10-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pbio.3003394
Rachael Miller, Vedrana Šlipogor, Kai R Caspar, Jimena Lois-Milevicich, Carl Soulsbury, Stephan A Reber, Claudia Mettke-Hofmann, Megan Lambert, Benjamin J Ashton, Alice M I Auersperg, Melissa Bateson, Solenne Belle, Boris Bilčík, Laura M Biondi, Francesco Bonadonna, Desiree Brucks, Michael W Butler, Samuel P Caro, Marion Charrier, Tiffany Chatelin, Johnathan Ching, Nicola S Clayton, Benjamin J Cluver, Ella B Cochran, Francesca Cornero, Emily Danby, Samara Danel, Martina Darwich, James R Davies, Alicia de la Colina, Dominik Fischer, Ondřej Fišer, Florencia Foitzick, Edward C Galluccio, Clara Garcia-Co, Elias Garcia-Pelegrin, Isabelle George, Kai-Philipp Gladow, Raúl O Gómez, Anna Grewer, Katie Grice, Lauren M Guillette, Devon C Hallihan, Katie J Harrington, Frauke Heer, Chloe Henry, Vladimira Hodova, Marisa Hoeschele, Cécilia Houdelier, Paula Ibáñez de Aldecoa, Oluwaseun Serah Iyasere, Yuka Kanemitsu, Mina Khodadadi, Duc Khong, Melanie G Kimball, Ariana N Klappert, Lucy N Koch, Uta U König von Borstel, Lubor Košt'ál, Anastasia Krasheninnikova, Lubica Kubikova, Connor T Lambert, Daan W Laméris, Courtenay G Lampert, Oceane Larousse, Christine R Lattin, Zhongqiu Li, Michael Lindenmeier, Delia A Lister, Julia A Mackenzie, Selina Mainz, Danna Masri, Jorg J M Massen, Laurenz Mohr, Wendt Müller, Paul M Nealen, Andreas Nieder, Aurèle Novac, Nínive Paes Cavalcante, Kristina Pascual, Carla Pascual-Guàrdia, Ayushi Patel, Katarína Pichová, Cristina Pilenga, Laurent Prétôt, John L Quinn, Elena Račevska, Juan C Reboreda, Sam Reynolds, Amanda R Ridley, Theresa Rössler, Francisco Ruiz-Raya, Marina Salas, Beatriz C Saldanha, Sebastián M Santiago, Nikola Schlöglová, Gia Seatriz, Eva Serrano-Davies, Eva G Shair Ali, Janja Sirovnik, Zuzana Skalná, Katie E Slocombe, Masayo Soma, Tiziana Srdoc, Stefan Stanescu, Michaela Syrová, Alex H Taylor, Christopher N Templeton, Karlie Thompson, Sandra Trigo, Camille A Troisi, Utku Urhan, Maurice Valbert, Kees van Oers, Alberto Velando, Frederick Verbruggen, Jorrit W Verkleij, Alizée Vernouillet, Jonas Verspeek, Petr Veselý, Auguste M P von Bayern, Eline Waalders, Benjamin A Whittaker, Ella R Williamson, Vanessa A D Wilson, Michelle A Winfield, Neslihan Wittek, Karen K L Yeung, Jade A Zanutto
{"title":"A large-scale study across the avian clade identifies ecological drivers of neophobia.","authors":"Rachael Miller, Vedrana Šlipogor, Kai R Caspar, Jimena Lois-Milevicich, Carl Soulsbury, Stephan A Reber, Claudia Mettke-Hofmann, Megan Lambert, Benjamin J Ashton, Alice M I Auersperg, Melissa Bateson, Solenne Belle, Boris Bilčík, Laura M Biondi, Francesco Bonadonna, Desiree Brucks, Michael W Butler, Samuel P Caro, Marion Charrier, Tiffany Chatelin, Johnathan Ching, Nicola S Clayton, Benjamin J Cluver, Ella B Cochran, Francesca Cornero, Emily Danby, Samara Danel, Martina Darwich, James R Davies, Alicia de la Colina, Dominik Fischer, Ondřej Fišer, Florencia Foitzick, Edward C Galluccio, Clara Garcia-Co, Elias Garcia-Pelegrin, Isabelle George, Kai-Philipp Gladow, Raúl O Gómez, Anna Grewer, Katie Grice, Lauren M Guillette, Devon C Hallihan, Katie J Harrington, Frauke Heer, Chloe Henry, Vladimira Hodova, Marisa Hoeschele, Cécilia Houdelier, Paula Ibáñez de Aldecoa, Oluwaseun Serah Iyasere, Yuka Kanemitsu, Mina Khodadadi, Duc Khong, Melanie G Kimball, Ariana N Klappert, Lucy N Koch, Uta U König von Borstel, Lubor Košt'ál, Anastasia Krasheninnikova, Lubica Kubikova, Connor T Lambert, Daan W Laméris, Courtenay G Lampert, Oceane Larousse, Christine R Lattin, Zhongqiu Li, Michael Lindenmeier, Delia A Lister, Julia A Mackenzie, Selina Mainz, Danna Masri, Jorg J M Massen, Laurenz Mohr, Wendt Müller, Paul M Nealen, Andreas Nieder, Aurèle Novac, Nínive Paes Cavalcante, Kristina Pascual, Carla Pascual-Guàrdia, Ayushi Patel, Katarína Pichová, Cristina Pilenga, Laurent Prétôt, John L Quinn, Elena Račevska, Juan C Reboreda, Sam Reynolds, Amanda R Ridley, Theresa Rössler, Francisco Ruiz-Raya, Marina Salas, Beatriz C Saldanha, Sebastián M Santiago, Nikola Schlöglová, Gia Seatriz, Eva Serrano-Davies, Eva G Shair Ali, Janja Sirovnik, Zuzana Skalná, Katie E Slocombe, Masayo Soma, Tiziana Srdoc, Stefan Stanescu, Michaela Syrová, Alex H Taylor, Christopher N Templeton, Karlie Thompson, Sandra Trigo, Camille A Troisi, Utku Urhan, Maurice Valbert, Kees van Oers, Alberto Velando, Frederick Verbruggen, Jorrit W Verkleij, Alizée Vernouillet, Jonas Verspeek, Petr Veselý, Auguste M P von Bayern, Eline Waalders, Benjamin A Whittaker, Ella R Williamson, Vanessa A D Wilson, Michelle A Winfield, Neslihan Wittek, Karen K L Yeung, Jade A Zanutto","doi":"10.1371/journal.pbio.3003394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Neophobia, or aversion to novelty, is important for adaptability and survival as it influences the ways in which animals navigate risk and interact with their environments. Across individuals, species and other taxonomic levels, neophobia is known to vary considerably, but our understanding of the wider ecological drivers of neophobia is hampered by a lack of comparative multispecies studies using standardized methods. Here, we utilized the ManyBirds Project, a Big Team Science large-scale collaborative open science framework, to pool efforts and resources of 129 collaborators at 77 institutions from 24 countries worldwide across six continents. We examined both difference scores (between novel object test and control conditions) and raw data of latency to touch familiar food in the presence (test) and absence (control) of a novel object among 1,439 subjects from 136 bird species across 25 taxonomic orders incorporating lab, field, and zoo sites. We first demonstrated that consistent differences in neophobia existed among individuals, among species, and among other taxonomic levels in our dataset, rejecting the null hypothesis that neophobia is highly plastic at all taxonomic levels with no evidence for evolutionary divergence. We then tested for effects of ecological factors on neophobia, including diet, sociality, habitat, and range, while accounting for phylogeny. We found that (i) species with more specialist diets were more neophobic than those with more generalist diets, providing support for the Neophobia Threshold Hypothesis; (ii) migratory species were also more neophobic than nonmigratory species, which supports the Dangerous Niche Hypothesis. Our study shows that the evolution of avian neophobia has been shaped by ecological drivers and demonstrates the potential of Big Team Science to advance our understanding of animal behavior.</p>","PeriodicalId":49001,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Biology","volume":"23 10","pages":"e3003394"},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Biology","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3003394","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Neophobia, or aversion to novelty, is important for adaptability and survival as it influences the ways in which animals navigate risk and interact with their environments. Across individuals, species and other taxonomic levels, neophobia is known to vary considerably, but our understanding of the wider ecological drivers of neophobia is hampered by a lack of comparative multispecies studies using standardized methods. Here, we utilized the ManyBirds Project, a Big Team Science large-scale collaborative open science framework, to pool efforts and resources of 129 collaborators at 77 institutions from 24 countries worldwide across six continents. We examined both difference scores (between novel object test and control conditions) and raw data of latency to touch familiar food in the presence (test) and absence (control) of a novel object among 1,439 subjects from 136 bird species across 25 taxonomic orders incorporating lab, field, and zoo sites. We first demonstrated that consistent differences in neophobia existed among individuals, among species, and among other taxonomic levels in our dataset, rejecting the null hypothesis that neophobia is highly plastic at all taxonomic levels with no evidence for evolutionary divergence. We then tested for effects of ecological factors on neophobia, including diet, sociality, habitat, and range, while accounting for phylogeny. We found that (i) species with more specialist diets were more neophobic than those with more generalist diets, providing support for the Neophobia Threshold Hypothesis; (ii) migratory species were also more neophobic than nonmigratory species, which supports the Dangerous Niche Hypothesis. Our study shows that the evolution of avian neophobia has been shaped by ecological drivers and demonstrates the potential of Big Team Science to advance our understanding of animal behavior.

一项横跨鸟类进化的大规模研究确定了新恐惧症的生态驱动因素。
新事物恐惧症,或对新奇事物的厌恶,对适应性和生存很重要,因为它会影响动物应对风险和与环境互动的方式。在个体,物种和其他分类水平上,新恐惧症已知差异很大,但由于缺乏使用标准化方法的比较多物种研究,我们对新恐惧症更广泛的生态驱动因素的理解受到阻碍。在这里,我们利用“多鸟计划”(ManyBirds Project)这一大型开放科学合作框架,汇集了来自全球六大洲24个国家77家机构的129名合作者的努力和资源。我们对来自实验室、野外和动物园等25个分类目136种鸟类的1439名受试者进行了研究,研究了在新物体测试和控制条件下接触熟悉食物的差异得分和原始数据。我们首先证明了新恐惧症在个体之间、物种之间以及我们数据集中的其他分类水平之间存在一致的差异,拒绝了新恐惧症在所有分类水平上都是高度可塑性的、没有进化差异证据的零假设。然后,我们测试了生态因素对新恐惧症的影响,包括饮食、社交、栖息地和范围,同时考虑了系统发育。我们发现(i)饮食更专业的物种比饮食更通才的物种更害怕新事物,这为新事物恐惧阈值假说提供了支持;(2)迁徙物种比非迁徙物种更害怕新事物,这支持了危险生态位假说。我们的研究表明,鸟类恐新症的进化是由生态驱动因素塑造的,并证明了大团队科学在促进我们对动物行为的理解方面的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS Biology
PLoS Biology BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY-BIOLOGY
CiteScore
15.40
自引率
2.00%
发文量
359
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Biology is the flagship journal of the Public Library of Science (PLOS) and focuses on publishing groundbreaking and relevant research in all areas of biological science. The journal features works at various scales, ranging from molecules to ecosystems, and also encourages interdisciplinary studies. PLOS Biology publishes articles that demonstrate exceptional significance, originality, and relevance, with a high standard of scientific rigor in methodology, reporting, and conclusions. The journal aims to advance science and serve the research community by transforming research communication to align with the research process. It offers evolving article types and policies that empower authors to share the complete story behind their scientific findings with a diverse global audience of researchers, educators, policymakers, patient advocacy groups, and the general public. PLOS Biology, along with other PLOS journals, is widely indexed by major services such as Crossref, Dimensions, DOAJ, Google Scholar, PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, and Web of Science. Additionally, PLOS Biology is indexed by various other services including AGRICOLA, Biological Abstracts, BIOSYS Previews, CABI CAB Abstracts, CABI Global Health, CAPES, CAS, CNKI, Embase, Journal Guide, MEDLINE, and Zoological Record, ensuring that the research content is easily accessible and discoverable by a wide range of audiences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信