It has been widely supported that individual animals express different strategies to cope with environmental challenge. In ectothermic species such as fish, individuals must use behavioral thermoregulation mechanisms to optimize physiological performance. In the present study, thermal preference was tested in groups of wild-type zebrafish, Danio rerio, screened for proactive and reactive animal personalities. Three replicate groups of proactive, reactive, and naive randomly sampled non-screened controls were used for the experiments. The frequency distribution of the animals was recorded in a custom-built multichamber tank under both constant temperature (temperature restricted conditions: TR) and a continuous thermal gradient profile (temperature choice: TCh ranging from 21°C to 35°C). Proactive and reactive animal personalities expressed significantly different thermal preferences and general activity within the temperature gradient. Our results show that proactive fish, generally characterized as being more aggressive, bold risk takers, and prone to routine formation, have a preference for higher temperature environments. Reactive fish, which are shy, less risk-prone, and more flexible, favor medium colder temperatures. This is the first report of thermopreferendum in zebrafish where individual animal personality coupled to freedom of thermal choice has been applied to understand variation in individual preferences within a population.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WilsonDS, ClarkAB, ColemanK, DearstyneT. Shyness and boldness in humans and other animals. Trends Ecol Evol, 1994; 9:442–446.
2.
KoolhaasJM, KorteSM, De BoerSF, Van Der VegtBJ, Van ReenenCG, HopsterH, et al.Coping styles in animals: current status in behavior and stress-physiology. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 1999; 23:925–935.
3.
KorteSM, KoolhaasJM, WingfieldJC, McEwenBS. The Darwinian concept of stress: benefits of allostasis and costs of allostatic load and the trade-offs in health and disease. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2005; 29:3–38.
4.
WolfM, Sander van DroonG, LeimarO, WeissingFJ. Life history trade-offs favour the evolution of animal personalities. Nature, 2007; 447:581–585.
5.
StampsJ, GroothiusTGG. The development of animal personality: relevance, concepts and perspectives. Biol Rev, 2010; 85:301–325.
6.
ReyS, BoltanaS, VargasR, RoherN, MackenzieS. Combining animal personalities with transcriptomics resolves individual variation within a wild-type zebrafish population and identifies underpinning molecular differences in brain function. Mol Ecol, 2013; 22:6100–6115.
7.
RéaleD, ReaderSM, SolD, McDougallPT, DingemanseNJ. Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biol Rev, 2007; 82:291–318.
8.
MontiglioPO, GarantD, ThomasD, RéaleD. Individual variation in temporal activity patterns in open-field tests. Anim Behav, 2010; 80:905–912.
9.
TranS, GerlaiR. Individual differences in activity levels in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Behav Brain Res, 2013; 257:224–229.
10.
DallSRX, HoustonAI, McNamaraJM. The behavioural ecology of personality: consistent individual differences from an adaptive perspective. Ecol Lett, 2004; 7:734–739.
11.
KoolhaasJM, De BoerSF, BuwaldaB, Van ReenenK. Individual variation in coping with stress: a multidimensional approach of ultimate and proximate mechanisms. Brain Behav Evol, 2007; 70:218–226.
12.
Ruiz-GomezM, HuntingfordFA, ØyvindØ, ThornqvistP-O, HoglundE. Response to environmental change in rainbow trout selected for diverged stress coping styles. Physiol Behav, 2011; 102:317–322.
13.
BiroPA, StampsJA. Do consistent individual differences in metabolic rate promote consistent individual differences in behavior? Review. Trends Ecol Evol, 2010a;25:11.
14.
ReidD, ArmstrongJD, MetcalfeNB. The performance advantage of a high resting metabolic rate in juvenile salmon is habitat dependent. J Anim Ecol, 2012; 81:868–875.
15.
CareauV, ThomasD, HumphriesMM, RéaleD. Energy metabolism and animal personality. Oikos, 2008; 117:641–653.
16.
WingfieldJC. Control of behavioural strategies for capricious environments. Anim Behav, 2003; 66:807–881.
17.
MackenzieS, RibasL, PilarczykM, CapdevilaDM, KadriS, HuntingfordAF. Screening for coping style increases the power of gene expression studies. PLoS One, 2009; 4:2–6.
18.
CoutantCC. Thermal preference: when does an asset become a liability?. Envir Biol Fish, 1987; 18:161–172.
19.
FryFEJ. Effects of the environment on animal activity. University of Toronto Studies, Biological Series No. 55. Publ Ontario Fish Res Lab, 1947; 68:1–62.
20.
ReynoldsWW, CasterlinME. Behavioral thermoregulation and the “final preferendum” paradigm. Am Zool, 1979; 19:211–224.
21.
BicegoKC, BarrosRCH, BrancoLGS. Physiology of temperature regulation: comparative aspects. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol, 2007; 147:616–639.
22.
GraceyAY, Jane FraserE, LiW, FangY, TaylorRR, RogersJ, et al.Coping with cold: an integrative, multitissue analysis of the transcriptome of a poikilothermic vertebrate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2004; 101:16970–16975.
23.
ScottGR, JohnstonIA. Temperature during embryonic development has persistent effects on thermal acclimation capacity in zebrafish. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2012; 109:14247–14252.
24.
SomeroGN. The physiology of global change: linking patterns to mechanisms. Ann Rev Mar Sci, 2012; 4:39–61.
25.
MorvanCLE, TroutaudD, DeschauxP. Perspective differential effects of temperature on specific and nonspecific immune defences in fish. J Exp Biol, 1998; 168:165–168.
26.
BoltañaS, ReyS, RoherN, VargasR, HuertaM, HuntingfordFA, et al.Behavioural fever is a synergic signal amplifying the innate immune response. Proc Biol Sci, 2013; 280:20131381.
27.
EngeszerRE, PattersonLB, RaoA, ParichyDM. Zebrafish in the wild: a review of natural history and new notes from the field. Zebrafish, 2007; 4:21–40.
28.
VargessonNA: ‘Zebrafish’ in Manual of Animal Technology. BarnettS (eds), Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK, 2007.
29.
SpenceR, GerlachG, LawrenceC. Smith C. The behaviour and ecology of the zebrafish, Danio rerio. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc, 2008; 83:13–34.
30.
MoretzJA, MartinsEP, RobisonBD. Behavioral syndromes and the evolution of correlated behavior in zebrafish. Behav Ecol, 2007; 18:556–562.
31.
OliveiraRF, SilvaJF, SimõesJM. Fighting zebrafish: characterization of aggressive behavior and winner-loser effects. Zebrafish, 2011; 8:73–81.
32.
BuskeC, GerlaiR. Shoaling develops with age in Zebrafish (Danio rerio). Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry, 2010; 35:6.
33.
FilbyAL, PaullGC, BartlettEJ, Van LookKJW, TylerCR. Physiological and health consequences of social status in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Physiol Behav, 2010; 101:576–587.
StewartA, CachatJ, WongK, GaikwadS, GilderT, DiLeoJ, et al.Homebase behavior of zebrafish in novelty-based paradigms. Behav Processes, 2010; 85:198–203.
36.
StewartAM, CachatJ, GreenJ, GaikwadS, KyzarE, RothA, et al.Constructing the habituome for phenotype-driven zebrafish research. Behav Brain Res, 2013; 236:110–117.
37.
GerlaiR, PrajapatiS, AhmadF. Differences in acute alcohol induced behavioural responses among zebrafish populations. Alcohol Clin Exp Res, 2008; 32:1763–1773.
38.
LawrenceC. The husbandry of zebrafish (Danio rerio): a review. Aquaculture, 2007; 269:1–20.
39.
HuntingfordFA, AndrewG, MackenzieS, MoreraD, CoyleSM, PilarczykM, et al.Coping strategies in a strongly schooling fish, the common carp Cyprinus carpio. J Fish Biol, 2010; 76:1576–1591.
40.
CastanheiraMF, HerreraM, CostasB, ConceiçãoLEC, MartinsCIM. Can we predict personality in fish? Searching for consistency over time and across contexts. PLoS One, 2013; 8:e62037.
41.
MillerN, GerlaiR. From schooling to shoaling: patterns of collective motion in zebrafish (Danio rerio). PLoS One, 2012; 7:e48865.
42.
PhamM, RaymondJ, HesterJ, KyzarE, GaikwadS, IndyaB, et al.Assessing social behavior phenotypes in adult zebrafish: shoaling, social preference and mirror biting tests. KalueffAllan V. and StewartAdam Michael (eds.) Zebrafish Protocols for Neurobehavioural Research. Neuromethods. 2012; 66.
43.
BiroPA, StampsJA. Are animal personality traits linked to life-history productivity?. Trends Ecol Evol, 2008; 23:361–368.
44.
ClarkeA, FraserKPP. Why does metabolism scale with temperature?. Func Ecol, 2004; 18:243–251.
45.
SchjoldenJ, BackstromT, PulmanKGT, PottingerTG, WinbergS. Divergence in behavioural responses to stress in two strains of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) with contrasting stress responsiveness. Horm Behav, 2005; 48:537–544.
46.
LaursenDC, OlsénHL, Ruiz-GomezML, WinbergS, HöglundE. Behavioural responses to hypoxia provide a non-invasive method for distinguishing between stress coping styles in fish. Appl Anim Behav Sci, 2011; 132:211–216.
47.
HamadaFN, RosenzweigM, KangK, PulverSR, GhezziA, JeglaTJ, et al.An internal thermal sensor controlling temperature preference in Drosophila. Nature, 2008; 454:217–220.
48.
VignetC, BégoutM-L, PéanS, LyphoutL, LeguayD, CousinX. Systematic screening of behavioral responses in two zebrafish strains. Zebrafish, 2013; 10:365–367.
49.
WengerSJ, SomNA, DauwalterDC, IsaakDJ, NevilleHM, LuceCH. Probabilistic accounting of uncertainty in forecasts of species distributions under climate change. Glob Chang Biol, 2013; 19:3343–3354.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
