IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v27y2016i4p1167-1171..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does antiparasite behavior improve with experience? An experimental test of the priming hypothesis

Author

Listed:
  • Scott M. Villa
  • Heidi E. Campbell
  • Sarah E. Bush
  • Dale H. Clayton

Abstract

Behavior is usually the first line of defense against parasites. Antiparasite behaviors, such as grooming, or outright avoidance, have been shown to reduce the risk of parasitism in a wide variety of host–parasite systems. However, despite the central importance of antiparasite behavior, little is known about the extent to which prior exposure to parasites improves effectiveness. Here, we report the results of a 2-year study designed to test whether exposure to parasites can "prime" behavior, loosely analogous to priming of the immune system. We tested whether preening improves with experience by infesting captive-bred rock pigeons (Columba livia) with 2 common species of rock pigeon feather lice. We infested "primed" birds in Years 1 and 2 of the study and "nonprimed" birds only in Year 2. Birds with lice preened about a third more, on average, than birds without lice. Birds subsequently cleared of lice resumed preening at the same rate as birds that never had lice. Thus, our results confirm that preening is an inducible, reversible defense that is partly triggered by the presence of lice. Surprisingly, primed birds did not differ significantly from nonprimed birds in the overall rate or the efficacy of preening. Primed and nonprimed birds preened at similar rates and had similar numbers of lice at the end of the study. Our results therefore provide little evidence that antiparasite behavior improves with experience, at least in the case of preening as a defense against feather lice.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott M. Villa & Heidi E. Campbell & Sarah E. Bush & Dale H. Clayton, 2016. "Does antiparasite behavior improve with experience? An experimental test of the priming hypothesis," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 27(4), pages 1167-1171.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:27:y:2016:i:4:p:1167-1171.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arw032
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:27:y:2016:i:4:p:1167-1171.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.