Individual foraging is under strong natural selection. Yet, whether individuals differ consistently in their foraging success across environments, and which individual- and population-level traits might drive such differences, is largely unknown. We addressed this question in a field experiment, conducting over 1,100 foraging trials with subpopulations of guppies, Poecilia reticulata, translocated across environments in the wild. We show that individuals consistently differed in reaching and acquiring food resources, but not control ‘resources’, across environments. Social individuals reached and acquired more food resources than less-social ones and males reached more food resources than females. Yet, overall, individuals were more likely to join females at resources than males, which might explain why individuals in subpopulations with relatively more females reached and acquired, on average, more food resources. Our results provide rare evidence for individual differences in foraging success across environments, driven by individual- and population-level (sex ratio) traits.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Open Access articles citing this article.
Communications Biology Open Access 20 January 2021
Scientific Reports Open Access 29 April 2020
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to Nature and 55 other Nature journal
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $9.92 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Humphries, N. E., Weimerskirch, H., Queiroz, N., Southall, E. J. & Sims, D. W. Foraging success of biological Lévy flights recorded in situ. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 7169–7174 (2012).
Merkle, J. A., Sigaud, M. & Fortin, D. To follow or not? How animals in fusion–fission societies handle conflicting information during group decision-making. Ecol. Lett. 18, 799–806 (2015).
Day, L. B., Crews, D. & Wilczynski, W. Spatial and reversal learning in congeneric lizards with different foraging strategies. Anim. Behav. 57, 393–407 (1999).
Sheenaja, K. K. & Thomas, K. J. Influence of habitat complexity on route learning among different populations of climbing perch (Anabas testudineus Bloch, 1792). Mar. Freshw. Behav. Physiol. 44, 349–358 (2011).
Bartumeus, F. et al. Foraging success under uncertainty: search tradeoffs and optimal space use. Ecol. Lett. 19, 1299–1313 (2016).
Aplin, L. M., Farine, D. R., Morand-Ferron, J. & Sheldon, B. C. Social networks predict patch discovery in a wild population of songbirds. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 279, 4199–4205 (2012).
Mattern, T., Ellenberg, U., Houston, D. M. & Davis, L. S. Consistent foraging routes and benthic foraging behaviour in yellow-eyed penguins. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 343, 295–306 (2007).
Patrick, S. C. et al. Individual differences in searching behaviour and spatial foraging consistency in a central place marine predator. Oikos 123, 33–40 (2014).
Niemelä, P. T. & Dingemanse, N. J. Individual versus pseudo-repeatability in behaviour: lessons from translocation experiments in a wild insect. J. Anim. Ecol. 86, 1033–1043 (2017).
Krause, J. & Ruxton, G. D. Living in Groups (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2002).
Laland, K. N. Social learning strategies. Anim. Learn. Behav. 32, 4–14 (2004).
Danchin, É., Giraldeau, L. A., Valone, T. J. & Wagner, R. H. Public information: from nosy neighbors to cultural evolution. Science 305, 487–491 (2004).
Webster, M. M., Whalen, A. & Laland, K. N. Fish pool their experience to solve problems collectively. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1, 0135 (2017).
Clark, C. W. & Mangel, M. The evolutionary advantages of group foraging. Theor. Popul. Biol. 30, 45–75 (1986).
Tanner, C. J. & Jackson, A. L. Social structure emerges via the interaction between local ecology and individual behaviour. J. Anim. Ecol. 81, 260–267 (2012).
Dall, S., Giraldeau, L., Olsson, O., Mcnamara, J. & Stephens, D. Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20, 187–193 (2005).
Galef, B. G. Jr & Giraldeau, L.-A. Social influences on foraging in vertebrates: causal mechanisms and adaptive functions. Anim. Behav. 61, 3–15 (2001).
Valone, T. J. & Templeton, J. J. Public information for the assessment of quality: a widespread social phenomenon. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 357, 1549–1557 (2002).
Giraldeau, L. A. & Caraco, T. Social Foraging Theory (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 2000).
Zajonc, R. B. Social facilitation. Science 149, 269–274 (1965).
Reader, S. M., Kendal, J. R. & Laland, K. N. Social learning of foraging sites and escape routes in wild Trinidadian guppies. Anim. Behav. 66, 729–739 (2003).
Morand-Ferron, J., Wu, G.-M. & Giraldeau, L.-A. Persistent individual differences in tactic use in a producer–scrounger game are group dependent. Anim. Behav. 82, 811–816 (2011).
Kurvers, R. H. J. M. et al. Personality predicts the use of social information. Ecol. Lett. 13, 829–837 (2010).
Wilson, A. D. M. et al. Dynamic social networks in guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 68, 915–925 (2014).
Wilson, A. D. M. et al. Social networks in changing environments. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 69, 1617–1629 (2015).
Krause, S. et al. Guppies occupy consistent positions in social networks: mechanisms and consequences. Behav. Ecol. 28, 429–438 (2017).
Laland, K. N. & Williams, K. Shoaling generates social learning of foraging information in guppies. Anim. Behav. 53, 1161–1169 (1997).
Swaney, W., Kendal, J., Capon, H., Brown, C. & Laland, K. N. Familiarity facilitates social learning of foraging behaviour in the guppy. Anim. Behav. 62, 591–598 (2001).
Day, R. L., MacDonald, T., Brown, C., Laland, K. N. & Reader, S. M. Interactions between shoal size and conformity in guppy social foraging. Anim. Behav. 62, 917–925 (2001).
Kendal, R. L., Coolen, I. & Laland, K. N. The role of conformity in foraging when personal and social information conflict. Behav. Ecol. 15, 269–277 (2004).
Reader, S. M. & Laland, K. N. Diffusion of foraging innovations in the guppy. Anim. Behav. 60, 175–180 (2000).
Lindström, K. & Ranta, E. Social preferences by male guppies, Poecilia reticulata, based on shoal size and sex. Anim. Behav. 46, 1029–1031 (1993).
Webster, M. M. & Laland, K. N. Local enhancement via eavesdropping on courtship displays in male guppies, Poecilia reticulata. Anim. Behav. 86, 75–83 (2013).
Croft, D. P. et al. Mechanisms underlying shoal composition in the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata. Oikos 100, 429–438 (2003).
Darden, S. K. & Croft, D. P. Male harassment drives females to alter habitat use and leads to segregation of the sexes. Biol. Lett. 4, 449–451 (2008).
Darden, S. K., James, R., Ramnarine, I. W. & Croft, D. P. Social implications of the battle of the sexes: sexual harassment disrupts female sociality and social recognition. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 276, 2651–2656 (2009).
Trivers, R. in Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man 1871–1971 (ed. Campbell, B.) 136–179 (Aldine, Chicago, 1972).
Reznick, D. & Yang, A. P. The influence of fluctuating resources on life history: patterns of allocation and plasticity in female guppies. Ecology 74, 2011–2019 (1993).
Abrahams, M. V. The trade-off between foraging and courting in male guppies. Anim. Behav. 45, 673–681 (1993).
Laland, K. N. & Reader, S. M. Foraging innovation in the guppy. Anim. Behav. 57, 331–340 (1999).
Griffiths, S. W. Sex differences in the trade-off between feeding and mating in the guppy. J. Fish Biol. 48, 891–898 (1996).
van de Waal, E., Renevey, N., Favre, C. M. & Bshary, R. Selective attention to philopatric models causes directed social learning in wild vervet monkeys. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 277, 2105–2111 (2010).
Silk, J. B., Alberts, S. C. & Altmann, J. Social bonds of female baboons enhance infant survival. Science 302, 1231–1234 (2003).
Cameron, E. Z., Setsaas, T. H. & Linklater, W. L. Social bonds between unrelated females increase reproductive success in feral horses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 13850–13853 (2009).
Griffiths, S. W. & Magurran, A. E. Sex and schooling behaviour in the Trinidadian guppy. Anim. Behav. 56, 689–693 (1998).
Webster, M. M. & Laland, K. N. Reproductive state affects reliance on public information in sticklebacks. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 278, 619–627 (2011).
Magurran, A. E. & Seghers, B. H. Variation in schooling and aggression amongst guppy (Poecilia reticulata) populations in Trinidad. Behaviour 118, 214–234 (1991).
Rodd, F. H. & Reznick, D. N. Variation in the demography of guppy populations: the importance of predation and life histories. Ecology 78, 405–418 (1997).
Pettersson, L. B., Ramnarine, I. W., Becher, S. A., Mahabir, R., & Magurran, A. E. Sex ratio dynamics and fluctuating selection pressures in natural populations of the Trinidadian guppy Poecilia reticulata. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 55, 461–468 (2004).
White, D. J., Watts, E., Pitchforth, K., Agyapong, S. & Miller, N. ‘Sociability’ affects the intensity of mate-choice copying in female guppies, Poecilia reticulata. Behav. Processes 141, 251–257 (2017).
Aureli, F. et al. Fission–fusion dynamics: new research frameworks. Curr. Anthropol. 49, 627–654 (2008).
Couzin, I. D. & Laidre, M. E. Fission–fusion populations. Curr. Biol. 19, R633–R635 (2009).
Hasenjager, M. J. & Dugatkin, L. A. Familiarity affects network structure and information flow in guppy (Poecilia reticulata) shoals. Behav. Ecol. 28, 233–242 (2017).
Laland, K. N. & Williams, K. Social transmission of maladaptive information in the guppy. Behav. Ecol. 9, 493–499 (1998).
Pelé, M. & Sueur, C. Decision-making theories: linking the disparate research areas of individual and collective cognition. Anim. Cogn. 16, 543–556 (2013).
Clément, R. J. G., Wolf, M., Snijders, L., Krause, J. & Kurvers, R. H. J. M. Information transmission via movement behaviour improves decision accuracy in human groups. Anim. Behav. 105, 85–93 (2015).
Rieucau, G. & Giraldeau, L.-A. Persuasive companions can be wrong: the use of misleading social information in nutmeg mannikins. Behav. Ecol. 20, 1217–1222 (2009).
Burns, J. G. & Rodd, F. H. Hastiness, brain size and predation regime affect the performance of wild guppies in a spatial memory task. Anim. Behav. 76, 911–922 (2008).
Borner, K. K. et al. Turbidity affects social dynamics in Trinidadian guppies. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 69, 645–651 (2015).
Croft, D. P. et al. Predation risk as a driving force for sexual segregation: a coss‐population comparison. Am. Nat. 167, 867–878 (2006).
Reznick, D. & Endler, J. A. The impact of predation on life history evolution in Trinidadian guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Evolution 36, 160 (1982).
Heathcote, R. J. P., Darden, S. K., Franks, D. W., Ramnarine, I. W. & Croft, D. P. Fear of predation drives stable and differentiated social relationships in guppies. Sci. Rep. 7, 41679 (2017).
Hasenjager, M. J. & Dugatkin, L. A. Fear of predation shapes social network structure and the acquisition of foraging information in guppy shoals. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 284, 20172020 (2017).
Beauchamp, G., Belisle, M. & Giraldeau, L.-A. Influence of conspecific attraction on the spatial distribution of learning foragers in a patchy habitat. J. Anim. Ecol. 66, 671–682 (1997).
Lucon-Xiccato, T. & Bisazza, A. Sex differences in spatial abilities and cognitive flexibility in the guppy. Anim. Behav. 123, 53–60 (2017).
Monk, C. T. et al. How ecology shapes exploitation: a framework to predict the behavioural response of human and animal foragers along exploration-exploitation trade-offs. Ecol. Lett. 21, 779–793 (2018).
Bell, A. M., Hankison, S. J. & Laskowski, K. L. The repeatability of behaviour: a meta-analysis. Anim. Behav. 77, 771–783 (2009).
Snijders, L. et al. Social networking in territorial great tits: slow explorers have the least central social network positions. Anim. Behav. 98, 95–102 (2014).
Cote, J., Fogarty, S. & Sih, A. Individual sociability and choosiness between shoal types. Anim. Behav. 83, 1469–1476 (2012).
Jolles, J. W., Boogert, N. J., Sridhar, V. H., Couzin, I. D. & Manica, A. Consistent individual differences drive collective behavior and group functioning of schooling fish. Curr. Biol. 27, 2862–2868.e7 (2017).
Clément, R. J. G. et al. Collective decision making in guppies: a cross-population comparison study in the wild. Behav. Ecol. 28, 919–924 (2017).
Magurran, A. E. Evolutionary Ecology: The Trinidadian Guppy (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2005).
Grether, G. F., Millie, D. F., Bryant, M. J., Reznick, D. N. & Mayea, W. Rain forest canopy cover, resource availability, and life history evolution in guppies. Ecology 82, 1546–1559 (2001).
Croft, D. P., Krause, J. & James, R. Social networks in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271, S516–S519 (2004).
Croft, D. P. et al. Sex-biased movement in the guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Oecologia 137, 62–68 (2003).
Kodric-Brown, A. Dietary carotenoids and male mating success in the guppy: an environmental component to female choice. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 25, 393–401 (1989).
Friard, O. & Gamba, M. BORIS: a free, versatile open-source event-logging software for video/audio coding and live observations. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 1325–1330 (2016).
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2017).
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. & Walker, S. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).
Stoffel, M. A., Nakagawa, S. & Schielzeth, H. rptR: repeatability estimation and variance decomposition by generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 1639–1644 (2017).
Boccaletti, S., Latora, V., Moreno, Y., Chavez, M. & Hwang, D.-U. Complex networks: structure and dynamics. Phys. Rep. 424, 175–308 (2006).
Farine, D. R. & Whitehead, H. Constructing, conducting and interpreting animal social network analysis. J. Anim. Ecol. 84, 1144–1163 (2015).
We are grateful to S. Bouet and S. García Martín for assistance with the video analysis and to F. Dhellemmes, H. te Brake and R. Seifert for assistance with the data collection. L.S. was funded by an IGB Postdoc Fellowship 2017.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Snijders, L., Kurvers, R.H.J.M., Krause, S. et al. Individual- and population-level drivers of consistent foraging success across environments. Nat Ecol Evol 2, 1610–1618 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-018-0658-4
This article is cited by
Communications Biology (2021)
Scientific Reports (2020)