Food acquisition mode in lizards (i.e., ambush vs. widely searching) has been intensely scrutinized for the past decade to identify correlations between food acquisition mode, diet, sprint speed, and other aspects of phenotypic diversity. To begin to understand these correlations, we studied foraging mode variation in natural foraging behavior and attack speed in three ambush predators and two widely foraging species in the field. Sequential analyses revealed considerable variation in the temporal structure of behavioral repertoires associated with acquiring food. Ambush and wide-foraging species use unique combinations of behaviors prior to prey attack with differences among and between food acquisition modes. Attack speeds were well below maximum sprint speed for these species. Thus, the widely demonstrated correlation between food acquisition mode and sprint speed is not related to prey capture per se. The striking variation in prey capture repertoires in these model ambush and wide foragers shows that we have a long way to go before we will understand the ecological relevance of many performance and phenotypic traits that are related to foraging mode in lizards.
AndersonR. A. (1993). Analysis of foraging in a lizard, Cnemidophorus tigris, salient features and environmental effects. In WrightJ. W.VittL. J. (Eds.), Biology of the whiptail lizards (Genus Cnemidophorus) (pp. 83–116). Norman, OK: Oklahoma Museum of Natural History.
2.
AndersonR. A. (2007). Food acquisition modes and habitat use in lizards, questions from an integrative perspective. In ReillyS. M.McBrayerL. B.MilesD. B. (Eds.), Lizard ecology, the evolutionary consequences of foraging mode (pp. 450–490). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
AngilettaM. J.Jr.HillT.RobsonM. A. (2002). Is physiological performance optimized by thermoregulatory behavior? A case study of the eastern fence lizard, Sceloporus undulatus. Journal of Thermal Biology, 27, 199–204.
4.
BakemanR.GottmanJ. M. (1986). Observing interaction, an introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BrañaF. (2003). Morphological correlates of burst speed and field movement patterns, the behavioural adjustment of locomotion in wall lizards (Podarcis muralis). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 80, 135–146.
6.
BonineK. E.GarlandT.G. (1999). Sprint performance of phrynosomatid lizards, measured on a high-speed treadmill, correlates with hindlimb length. Journal of Zoology London, 248, 255–265.
7.
ButlerM. A. (2005). Foraging mode of the chameleon, Bradypodion pumilum, a challenge to the sit-and-wait versus active forager paradigm?Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 84, 797–808.
8.
ChenS.YeelinL. A.BowensN. M.HuberR.KravitzE.A. (2002). Fighting in fruit flies, a model system for the study of aggression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 99, 5664–5668.
9.
CooperW. E. (2005). The foraging mode controversy, both continuous variation and clustering of foraging movements occur. Journal of Zoology, 267, 179–190.
10.
CooperW. E.VittL. J.CaldwellJ. P.FoxS. F. (2001). Foraging modes of some American lizards, relationships among measurement variable and discreteness of modes. Herpetologica, 57, 65–76.
11.
CooperW. E.VittL. J.CaldwellJ. P.FoxS. F. (2005). Relationships among foraging variables, phylogeny, and foraging modes, with new data for nine North American lizard species. Herpetologica, 61, 250–259.
12.
CrowleyS. R. (1985). Thermal sensitivity of sprint running in the lizard Sceloporus undulatus, support for a conservative view of thermal physiology. Oecologia, 66, 219–225.
13.
DialK. P.GreenE.IrschickD. J. (2008). Allometry of behavior. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 23, 394–401.
14.
EckhardtR. C. (1979). The adaptive syndrome of two guilds of insectivorous birds in the Colorado Rocky Mountains. Ecological Monographs, 49, 129–149.
15.
EggeA. R.BrantY.SwallowJ. G. (2011). Sequential analysis of aggressive interactions in the stalk-eyed fly Teleopsis dalmanni. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 65, 369–379.
16.
EvansL. T. (1961). Structure as related to behavior in the organization of populations of reptiles. In BlairW.F. (Ed.), Vertebrate speciation (pp. 148–178). Austin, TX: University of Texas.
GansC. (1979). Momentarily excessive construction as the basis for protoadaptation. Evolution, 33, 227–233.
19.
GarlandT.Jr. (1993). Locomotor performance and activity metabolism of Cnemidophorus tigris in relation to natural behaviours. In WrightJ. W.VittL. J. (Eds.), Biology of the whiptail lizards (Genus Cnemidophorus) (pp. 163–210). Norman, OK: Oklahoma Museum of Natural History.
20.
GarlandT. G.LososJ. B. (1994). Ecological morphology of locomotor performance in squamate reptiles. In WainwrightP. C.ReillyS. M. (Eds.), Ecological morphology, integrative organismal biology (pp. 240–302). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
GreefJ. M.WhitingM. J. (2000). Foraging mode plasticity in the lizard Platysaurus broadleyi. Herpetologica, 56, 402–407.
22.
HertzP. E.HueyR. B.GarlandT.Jr. (1988). Time budgets, thermoregulation, and maximal locomotor performance. Are reptiles Olympians or boy scouts?American Zoologist, 28, 927–938.
23.
HueyR. B.BennettA. F.John-AlderH. B.NagyK. A. (1984). Locomotor capacity and foraging behaviour of Kalahari lacertid lizards. Animal Behaviour, 32, 41–50.
24.
HueyR. B.PiankaE. R. (1981). Ecological consequences of foraging mode. Ecology, 62, 991–999.
25.
HusakJ. F.FoxS. F. (2006). Field use of maximal sprint speed by collared lizards (Crotaphytus collaris), compensation and sexual selection. Evolution, 60, 1888–1895.
26.
IrschickD. J. (2000). Effects of behaviour and ontogeny on the locomotor performance of a West Indian lizard, Anolis lineatopus. Functional Ecology, 14, 438–444.
27.
IrschickD. J.GarlandT.Jr. (2001). Integrating function and ecology in studies of adaptation, investigations of locomotor capacity as a model system. Annual Review Ecology Systematics, 32, 367–396.
28.
IrschickD. J.HerrelA.VanhooydonckB.HuygheK.Van DammeR. (2005). Locomotor compensation creates a mismatch between laboratory and field estimates of escape speed in lizards, a cautionary tale for performance-to-fitness studies. Evolution, 59, 1579–1587.
29.
IrschickD. J.LososJ. B. (1998). A comparative analysis of the ecological significance of maximal locomotor performance in Caribbean Anolis lizards. Evolution, 52, 219–226.
30.
JayneB. C.IrschickD. J. (2000). A field study of incline use and preferred speeds for the locomotion of lizards. Ecology, 81, 2969–2983.
31.
LeacheA. D.ReederT. W. (2002). Molecular systematics of the eastern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus): A comparison of parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian approaches. Systematic Biology, 51, 44–68.
LososJ. B.IrschickD. J. (1996). The effect of perch diameter on escape behaviour of Anolis lizards, laboratory predictions and field tests. Animal Behaviour, 51, 593–602.
35.
McBrayerL. D.MilesD. B.ReillyS. M. (2007). The evolution of the foraging mode paradigm in lizard ecology. In ReillyS. M.McBrayerL. B.MilesD. B. (Eds.), Lizard ecology, the evolutionary consequences of foraging mode (pp. 508–521). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
36.
McElroyE. J.MeyersJ. J.ReillyS. M.IrschickD. J. (2007). Dissecting the effects of behavior and habitat on the locomotion of a lizard (Urosaurus ornatus). Animal Behaviour, 73, 359–365.
37.
MilesD. B. (1994). Covariation between morphology and locomotory performance in Sceloporine lizards. In VittL. J.PiankaE. R. (Eds.), Lizard ecology historical and experimental perspectives (pp. 207–236). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
MilesD. B.LososJ. B.IrschickD. J. (2007). Morphology, performance, and foraging mode. In ReillyS. M.McBrayerL. B.MilesD. B. (Eds.), Lizard ecology, the evolutionary consequences of foraging mode (pp. 49–93). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
NilsenS. P.ChanY.HuberR.KravitzE. A. (2004). Gender-selective patterns of aggressive behavior in Drosophila melanogaster. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 101, 12342–12347.
40.
PerryG. (1999). The evolution of search modes, ecological versus phylogenetic perspectives. American Naturalist, 15, 98–105.
41.
PerryG. (2007). Movement patterns in lizards, measurement, modality, and behavioral correlates. In ReillyS. M.McBrayerL. B.MilesD. B. (Eds.), Lizard ecology, the evolutionary consequences of foraging mode (pp. 13–48). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42.
PiankaE. R.HueyR. B.LawlorL. R. (1979). Niche segregation in desert lizards. In HornD. J.StairsR.MitchellR. D. (Eds.), Analysis of ecological systems (pp. 67–115). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.
43.
PiankaE. R.VittL. J. (2003). Lizards, windows to the evolution of diversity. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
44.
R Development Core Team (2009). R, A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from: http://www.R-project.org.
45.
RegalP. J. (1983). The adaptive zone and behavior of lizards. In HueyR. B.PiankaE. R.SchoenerT. W. (Eds.), Lizard ecology, studies of a model organism (pp. 105–118). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46.
ReillyS. M.McBrayerL. B. (2007). Prey attack and prey processing behavior and the evolution of lingual and sensory characteristics, divergences and convergences in lizard feeding biology. In ReillyS. M.McBrayerL. B.MilesD. B. (Eds.), Lizard ecology, the evolutionary consequences of foraging mode (pp. 302–333). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
ReillyS. M.McBrayerL. B.MilesD. B. (Eds.) (2007). Lizard ecology, the evolutionary consequences of foraging mode. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48.
ReillyS. M.WainwrightP.C. (1994). Ecological morphology and the power of integration. In WainwrightP. C.ReillyS. M. (Eds.), Ecological morphology, integrative approaches in organismal biology (pp. 339–354). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.
RobsonM. A.MilesD. B. (2000). Locomotor performance and dominance in male tree lizards, Urosaurus ornatus. Functional Ecology, 14, 338–344.
50.
RoseE. L. (2004). Foraging behavior in Gambelia wizlizenii, the long-nosed leopard lizard, in Harney County, Oregon. Unpublished master’s thesis, Western Washington University.
51.
SaltG. W. (1967). Predation in an experimental protozoan population (Woodruffia-Paramecium). Ecological Monographs, 37, 113–144.
52.
SAS Institute (2007). SAS (Version 9) [Computer software]. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
53.
VanhooydonckB.Van DammeR.AertsP. (2001). Speed and stamina trade-off in lacertid lizards. Evolution, 55, 1040–1048.
54.
VerwaijenD.Van DammeR. (2008). Foraging mode and locomotor capacities in Lacertidae. Amphibia-Reptilia, 29, 197–206.
55.
WebbP. W. (1986). Locomotion and predator prey relationships. In FederM. E.LauderG. V. (Eds.), Predator–prey relationships, perspectives and approaches from the study of lower vertebrates (pp. 24–41). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
56.
WilliamsS. C.McBrayerL. D. (2011). Attack-based indices, not movement patterns, reveal intraspecific variation in foraging behavior. Behavioral Ecology. doi: 10.1093/arr08210.1093/arr082.
