@article{MazzaDammhahnEccardetal.2019, author = {Mazza, Valeria and Dammhahn, Melanie and Eccard, Jana and Palme, Rupert and Zaccaroni, Marco and Jacob, Jens}, title = {Coping with style: individual differences in responses to environmental variation}, series = {Behavioral ecology and sociobiology}, volume = {73}, journal = {Behavioral ecology and sociobiology}, number = {10}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {New York}, issn = {0340-5443}, doi = {10.1007/s00265-019-2760-2}, pages = {11}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Between-individual differences in coping with stress encompass neurophysiological, cognitive and behavioural reactions. The coping style model proposes two alternative response patterns to challenges that integrate these types of reactions. The "proactive strategy" combines a general fight-or-flight response and inflexibility in learning with a relatively low HPA (hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal) response. The "reactive strategy" includes risk aversion, flexibility in learning and an enhanced HPA response. Although numerous studies have investigated the possible covariance of cognitive, behavioural and physiological responses, findings are still mixed. In the present study, we tested the predictions of the coping style model in an unselected population of bank voles (Myodes glareolus) (N = 70). We measured the voles' boldness, activity, speed and flexibility in learning and faecal corticosterone metabolite levels under three conditions (holding in indoor cages, in outdoor enclosures and during open field test). Individuals were moderately consistent in their HPA response across situations. Proactive voles had significantly lower corticosterone levels than reactive conspecifics in indoor and outdoor conditions. However, we could not find any co-variation between cognitive and behavioural traits and corticosterone levels in the open field test. Our results partially support the original coping style model but suggest a more complex relationship between cognitive, behavioural and endocrine responses than was initially proposed.}, language = {en} } @article{MazzaEccardZaccaronietal.2018, author = {Mazza, Valeria and Eccard, Jana and Zaccaroni, Marco and Jacob, Jens and Dammhahn, Melanie}, title = {The fast and the flexible}, series = {Animal behaviour}, volume = {137}, journal = {Animal behaviour}, publisher = {Elsevier}, address = {London}, issn = {0003-3472}, doi = {10.1016/j.anbehav.2018.01.011}, pages = {119 -- 132}, year = {2018}, language = {en} } @misc{MazzaJacobDammhahnetal.2019, author = {Mazza, Valeria and Jacob, Jens and Dammhahn, Melanie and Zaccaroni, Marco and Eccard, Jana}, title = {Individual variation in cognitive style reflects foraging and antipredator strategies in a small mammal}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {761}, issn = {1866-8372}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43711}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-437118}, pages = {9}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Balancing foraging gain and predation risk is a fundamental trade-off in the life of animals. Individual strategies to acquire, process, store and use information to solve cognitive tasks are likely to affect speed and flexibility of learning, and ecologically relevant decisions regarding foraging and predation risk. Theory suggests a functional link between individual variation in cognitive style and behaviour (animal personality) via speed-accuracy and risk-reward trade-offs. We tested whether cognitive style and personality affect risk-reward trade-off decisions posed by foraging and predation risk. We exposed 21 bank voles (Myodes glareolus) that were bold, fast learning and inflexible and 18 voles that were shy, slow learning and flexible to outdoor enclosures with different risk levels at two food patches. We quantified individual food patch exploitation, foraging and vigilance behaviour. Although both types responded to risk, fast animals increasingly exploited both food patches, gaining access to more food and spending less time searching and exercising vigilance. Slow animals progressively avoided high-risk areas, concentrating foraging effort in the low-risk one, and devoting >50\% of visit to vigilance. These patterns indicate that individual differences in cognitive style/personality are reflected in foraging and anti-predator decisions that underlie the individual risk-reward bias.}, language = {en} } @article{MazzaJacobDammhahnetal.2019, author = {Mazza, Valeria and Jacob, Jens and Dammhahn, Melanie and Zaccaroni, Marco and Eccard, Jana}, title = {Individual variation in cognitive style reflects foraging and antipredator strategies in a small mammal}, series = {Scientific Reports}, volume = {9}, journal = {Scientific Reports}, publisher = {Macmillan Publishers Limited, part of Springer Nature}, address = {London}, issn = {2045-2322}, doi = {10.1038/s41598-019-46582-1}, pages = {9}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Balancing foraging gain and predation risk is a fundamental trade-off in the life of animals. Individual strategies to acquire, process, store and use information to solve cognitive tasks are likely to affect speed and flexibility of learning, and ecologically relevant decisions regarding foraging and predation risk. Theory suggests a functional link between individual variation in cognitive style and behaviour (animal personality) via speed-accuracy and risk-reward trade-offs. We tested whether cognitive style and personality affect risk-reward trade-off decisions posed by foraging and predation risk. We exposed 21 bank voles (Myodes glareolus) that were bold, fast learning and inflexible and 18 voles that were shy, slow learning and flexible to outdoor enclosures with different risk levels at two food patches. We quantified individual food patch exploitation, foraging and vigilance behaviour. Although both types responded to risk, fast animals increasingly exploited both food patches, gaining access to more food and spending less time searching and exercising vigilance. Slow animals progressively avoided high-risk areas, concentrating foraging effort in the low-risk one, and devoting >50\% of visit to vigilance. These patterns indicate that individual differences in cognitive style/personality are reflected in foraging and anti-predator decisions that underlie the individual risk-reward bias.}, language = {en} }