Chapin Kenneth James, Hill-Lindsay Sloan
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, United States.
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, United States.
Behav Processes. 2016 Jan;122:110-5. doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2015.11.014. Epub 2015 Dec 2.
Territoriality has an extensive and thorough history of research, but has been difficult to impossible to test empirically in most species. We offer a method for testing for territoriality by measuring the motivation of territory intruders to win contests in controlled trials. We demonstrated this approach by staging paired trials of the Amblypygi Phrynus longipes (Chelicerata: Arachnida). Amblypygids engaged in agonistic interactions after the opportunity to establish a putative territory on one side of an arena. We found that intruders of putative territories had lower motivation to win contests, thus evidencing territoriality. Physical components of individuals (i.e. energy stores) increased the probability of winning the contest for holders but not intruders, thereby providing insight into the differing decision rules opponents use in territory contests. We discuss why alternative hypotheses, including loser-initiator covariation and home field bourgeois advantage, fail empirical tests. We demonstrated that analyzing animal motivation in territorial contests is tractable even for animals where territories are inconspicuous and cues are outside the normal perceptions of researchers.
领域性有着广泛而深入的研究历史，但在大多数物种中很难甚至无法进行实证检验。我们提供了一种通过在对照试验中测量领地入侵者赢得竞争的动机来检验领域性的方法。我们通过对长脚幽灵蛛（螯肢亚门：蛛形纲）进行配对试验来证明这种方法。在有机会在竞技场一侧建立假定领地后，幽灵蛛会进行争斗互动。我们发现，假定领地的入侵者赢得竞争的动机较低，从而证明了领域性的存在。个体的身体特征（即能量储备）增加了领地所有者赢得竞争的概率，但对入侵者没有影响，从而揭示了对手在领地竞争中使用的不同决策规则。我们讨论了为什么包括失败者-发起者协变和主场优势在内的其他假设未能通过实证检验。我们证明，即使对于领地不明显且线索超出研究人员正常认知范围的动物，分析其在领地竞争中的动机也是可行的。
