Abstract
Research on social behaviour has largely concentrated on birds and mammals in visually active, cooperatively breeding groups (although such systems are relatively rare) and focused much less on species that rarely interact other than for mating and parental care. We used microsatellite markers to characterize relatedness among aggregations of timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus), a putatively solitary reptile that relies heavily on chemical cues, and found that juveniles and pregnant females preferentially aggregate with kin under certain conditions. The ability to recognize kin and enhance indirect fitness thus might be far more widespread than implied by studies of animals whose behaviour is primarily visually and/or acoustically mediated, and we predict that molecular markers will reveal many additional examples of ‘cryptic’ sociality.
Keywords: social behaviour, kin recognition, indirect fitness, Crotalus horridus, aggregation
1. Introduction
Vertebrates can be obviously social, living in stable, structured groups that exhibit complex cooperative interactions. These groups are often kin-based, since individuals can derive indirect fitness benefits from cooperating with relatives [1,2], and in extreme cases, group members forego reproduction to care for the young of others [3,4]. Much research has focused on these cooperatively breeding groups (reviewed in Komdeur et al. [5]), although they comprise only a small percentage of avian and mammalian systems. Conversely, many ‘solitary’ species might also exhibit kin-structured cryptic sociality, especially those whose interactions are chemically rather than visually or acoustically mediated, but far less work has addressed these interactions (reviewed in Hatchwell et al. [6]).
Squamate reptiles are proving ideal for research on incipient sociality. With few exceptions, notably several lizard species [7–10], squamates generally have been viewed as asocial apart from antagonistic interactions and mating behaviours [11]. However, many species aggregate with conspecifics during key stages in their life cycles (e.g. ecdysis, gestation, parturition, hibernation/aestivation) [12,13], and although such aggregations often appear to be based on a common physical resource, some entail mutually beneficial behaviours with conspecifics, such as thermoregulation [14,15]. Because indirect selection might favour those behaviours if directed towards kin, conspecific attraction may be non-random with respect to relatedness and thereby serve as a precursor to the evolution of more complex, overtly social groups. Here, we use microsatellite markers to examine the relatedness of timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus) sampled from naturally occurring aggregations.
2. Methods
Crotalus horridus uses communal wintering dens (hibernacula) throughout northern portions of its range, and both sexes exhibit high levels of philopatry to the natal hibernaculum [16]. Individuals emerge in spring, spend several days basking at rock outcrops, and then migrate to surrounding areas to forage and mate [16]. In autumn, they move back to hibernacula to overwinter. Females reproduce on average every third year, and when pregnant do not undergo a summer migration; they instead bask at ‘rookeries’ before giving birth in the autumn [17]. In C. horridus and other viperids, females often aggregate at these birthing rookeries [12]. We obtained tissue samples from pregnant females at birthing rookeries and from all individuals at basking areas during emergence and ingress, allowing us to compare relatedness between aggregated individuals and random individuals from the same population that were not aggregated. We did not include litters of neonates. Population sampling and genotyping are as previously described in Clark et al. [18].
We used Relatedness v. 5.0 software to calculate pairwise relatedness between all individuals from the same hibernaculum [19], then randomization procedures [20] to compare observed relatedness to an equal number of randomly generated pairs of individuals matched for sex, age and hibernaculum of origin. Randomized datasets were generated 1000 times, and observed samples were considered to be significant if average relatedness was greater than 95 per cent of random samples. For aggregations of individuals other than pregnant females, we first used a two-way ANOVA to determine if either age or sex significantly affected pairwise relatedness, then used randomization procedures to examine relatedness within any sex or age class identified as a significant factor. All mean values are reported as mean ± s.e. Details for data and material sharing can be found in the electronic supplementary material.
3. Results
During the summer gestation period, we collected tissue samples from 29 pregnant females aggregated at 12 birthing sites (figure 1). During spring emergence and autumn ingress, we collected samples from snakes at basking sites associated with 18 hibernacula. Over all hibernacula, 113 of the 419 sampled snakes were aggregated with other individuals, and they included adult and juvenile males and females. Based on male/female and adult/juvenile ratios in our sample, the pairwise sex and age of snakes in aggregations was not different from random pairings of individuals (sex: χ2 = 0.27, d.f. = 2, p > 0.5 ; age: χ2 = 0.1, d.f. = 2, p > 0.5).
Figure 1.
Aggregated pregnant female Crotalus horridus at summer birthing rookery (photo Polly Smith-Blackwell).
Overall, individuals from the same hibernaculum did not exhibit significant pairwise relatedness (average r = −0.04 ± 0.03). However, average pairwise relatedness between aggregated pregnant females was greater than random (r = 0.09 ± 0.05, p = 0.02). In aggregations with more than two females, at least two always shared relatedness (r > 0.15), and the average relatedness of only the most related pair was 0.21 ± 0.05 (p < 0.001; figure 2). Related female pairs included both same-age females and those that differed by 5–10 years in age, indicating aggregations occur between relatives of different generations.
Figure 2.
Average pairwise relatedness between aggregated timber rattlesnakes. Overall denotes average pairwise relatedness (r) across all snakes, all hibernacula; all pregnant females represent all pairs of females aggregated at birthing rookeries; pregnant female pairs denote most highly related pairs in aggregations with more than two pregnant females; all individuals denote all individuals aggregated during ingress to and emergence from (abbreviated as i/e) hibernacula; juveniles pairs denote juveniles aggregated during i/e; same cohort juv pairs represent same-age juvenile pairs aggregated during i/e. Significant values denoted by *p < 0.05, **p < 0.001.
Average pairwise relatedness of aggregated snakes during emergence and ingress was not different from random (r = 0.02 ± 0.03, p = 0.26; figure 2). A two-way ANOVA found that age, but not sex, was a significant factor (p = 0.006), with no significant interaction effects. Average relatedness was not significant for dyads with either two adults or one adult and one juvenile (r = 0.07 ± 0.04, p = 0.81; r = 0.01 ± 0.05, p = 0.33), but greater than random for dyads with both juveniles (r = 0.11 ± 0.05, p = 0.01). Of the 29 juvenile dyads, 17 were same-age and 12 were from different cohorts. The average relatedness of the juveniles from the same cohort was greater than random (r = 0.21 ± 0.09, p = 0.01), whereas the average relatedness of juveniles from different cohorts was not (r = 0.01 ± 0.06, p = 0.28), indicating that high relatedness among juvenile pairs is probably driven by continued association of littermates (figure 2).
4. Discussion
Juvenile and pregnant timber rattlesnakes in the field preferentially aggregate with kin, but other aggregations show no kin preference. Past studies have implicated individual functional benefits from aggregation in crotaline species [12], and our results suggest further benefits may accrue when aggregating with kin. For example, females often thermoregulate in open habitats during gestation, exposing themselves to diverse mammalian and avian predators [21]. When confronted with a predator, rattlesnakes may exhibit group defence, possibly coordinated with an alarm pheromone [22], and individuals may be more likely to engage predators if there are relatives nearby that could benefit from such behaviour.
Individuals may also benefit from kin aggregation through physiological processes. For example, newborn sidewinder rattlesnakes maintain optimal temperatures in a thermally extreme environment through a dynamic ‘balling’ behaviour, performed in the presence of their mother [23]. Although the inter-individual dynamics of group thermoregulation in snakes have not been examined in detail, cooperation may be necessary to ensure access to critical physical locations within the group. If so, these processes may be more efficient when group members are related and thereby can result in indirect as well as direct benefits. Moreover, benefits relating to thermoregulation and hydration may be more important for smaller snakes, because of increased surface area to volume ratios, and to pregnant females, which need higher and less variable temperatures during gestation [24]. Thus, snakes may exhibit stronger tendencies to aggregate with kin at times when such aggregation can be most beneficial.
This study is the latest in a series of investigations that highlight the complex social lives of timber rattlesnakes. Newborn individuals use conspecific chemical cues to locate overwintering sites [25,26], and the survival rate of neonates separated from their mothers after birth was half that of neonates left with their mothers [27]; individuals in captivity preferentially associate with kin as well as use conspecific chemical cues to guide decisions about foraging and habitat use [28,29]. These long-lived reptiles evidently have subtle but complex social lives that have long been underappreciated. This may be true of snakes in general, as recent research has revealed parental care, kin recognition and cryptic sociality in several other species [30–33]. Molecular genetic approaches will probably continue to reveal that many secretive species exhibit more complex social lives than previously expected.
Acknowledgements
Molecular data were collected in the Evolutionary Genetics Core Facility at Cornell University; we thank K. Zamudio and S. Bogdanowicz for assistance with laboratory procedures. This project was funded by research grants (to R.W.C. and H.W.G.) from the New York State Biodiversity Research Institute (NYHER 051122), the Biocomplexity and Biogeochemistry Initiative at Cornell University, and the Edna Bailey Sussman Environmental Research Internship. Early-stage funding from the National Geographic Society assisted the surveys of W.S.B. in region AD, and the Natural Heritage Programme of the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) provided funding for annual surveys by R.S. in the BM and SF regions.
References
- 1.Hamilton W. D. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour I. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1–16 10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 (doi:10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Hamilton W. D. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour II. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 17–52 10.1016/0022-5193(64)90039-6 (doi:10.1016/0022-5193(64)90039-6) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Emlen S. T. 1982. The evolution of helping, I. An ecological constraints model. Am. Nat. 119, 29–40 10.1086/283888 (doi:10.1086/283888) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Emlen S. T. 1982. The evolution of helping, II. The role of behavioral conflict. Am. Nat. 119, 40–53 10.1086/283889 (doi:10.1086/283889) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Komdeur J., Eikenaar C., Brouwer L., Richardson D. S. 2008. The evolution and ecology of cooperative breeding in vertebrates. In Encyclopedia of life sciences, pp. 1–8 Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd [Google Scholar]
- 6.Hatchwell B. J. 2010. Cryptic kin selection: kin structure in vertebrate populations and opportunities for kin-directed cooperation. Ethology 116, 203–216 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2009.01732.x (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.2009.01732.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 7.McAlpin S., Duckett P., Stow A. 2011. Lizards cooperatively tunnel to construct a long-term home for family members. PLoS ONE 6, e19041. 10.1371/journal.pone.0019041 (doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0019041) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Gardner M. G., Bull C. M., Cooper S. J. B., Duffield G. A. 2001. Genetic evidence for a family structure in stable social aggregations of the Australian lizard Egernia stokesii. Mol. Ecol. 10, 175–183 10.1046/j.1365-294X.2001.01171.x (doi:10.1046/j.1365-294X.2001.01171.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Davis A. R., Corl A., Surget-Groba Y., Sinervo B. 2010. Convergent evolution of kin-based sociality in a lizard. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 1507–1514 10.1098/rspb.2010.1703 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1703) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Burghardt G. M., Greene H. W., Rand A. S. 1977. Social behavior in hatchling green iguanas: life at a reptile rookery. Science 195, 689–691 10.1126/science.195.4279.689 (doi:10.1126/science.195.4279.689) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Wilson E. O. 1975. Sociobiology: the new synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard [Google Scholar]
- 12.Graves B. M., Duvall D. 1995. Aggregation of squamate reptiles associated with gestation, oviposition, and parturition. Herpetol. Monogr. 9, 102–119 10.2307/1466999 (doi:10.2307/1466999) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Gillingham J. C. 1987. Social behavior. In Snakes: ecology and evolutionary biology (eds Seigel R. A., Collins J. T., Novak S. S.), pp. 184–209 New York, NY: Macmillan [Google Scholar]
- 14.Graves B. M., Duvall D. 1987. An experimental study of aggregation and thermoregulation in prairie rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridis viridis). Herpetologica 43, 259–264 [Google Scholar]
- 15.Aubret F., Shine R. 2009. Causes and consequences of aggregation by neonatal tiger snakes (Notechis scutatus, Elapidae). Aust. Ecol. 34, 210–217 10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01923.x (doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2008.01923.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Brown W. S. 1993. Biology, status, and management of the timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus): a guide for conservation. Herpetol. Circ. 22, 1–78 [Google Scholar]
- 17.Brown W. S. 1991. Female reproductive ecology in a northern population of the timber rattlesnake, Crotalus horridus. Herpetologica 47, 101–115 [Google Scholar]
- 18.Clark R. W., Brown W. S., Stechert R., Zamudio K. R. 2008. Integrating individual behaviour and landscape genetics: the population structure of timber rattlesnake hibernacula. Mol. Ecol. 17, 719–730 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03594.x (doi:10.1111/j.1365-294X.2007.03594.x) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Queller D. C., Goodnight K. F. 1989. Estimating relatedness using genetic markers. Evolution 43, 258–275 10.2307/2409206 (doi:10.2307/2409206) [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Simon J. L. 1997. Resampling: the new statistics, 2nd edn Belmont, CA: Wadsworth [Google Scholar]
- 21.Greene H. W. 1988. Antipredator mechanisms in reptiles. In Biology of the reptilia (eds Gans C., Huey R. B.), pp. 1–152 New York, NY: Alan R. Liss, Inc [Google Scholar]
- 22.Graves B. M., Duvall D. 1988. Evidence of an alarm pheromone from the cloacal sacs of prairie rattlesnakes. Southwestern Nat. 33, 339–346 10.2307/3671762 (doi:10.2307/3671762) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Reiserer R. S., Schuett G. W., Earley R. L. 2008. Dynamic aggregations of newborn sibling rattlesnakes exhibit stable thermoregulatory properties. J. Zool. 274, 277–283 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2007.00383.x (doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2007.00383.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Gardner-Santana L. C., Beaupre S. J. 2009. Timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus) exhibit elevated and less variable body temperatures during pregnancy. Copeia 2009, 363–368 10.1643/CP-07-271 (doi:10.1643/CP-07-271) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Reinert H. K., Zappalorti R. T. 1988. Field observation of the association of adult and neonatal timber rattlesnakes, Crotalus horridus, with possible evidence for conspecific trailing. Copeia 1998, 1057–1059 10.2307/1445732 (doi:10.2307/1445732) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Brown W. S., Maclean F. M. 1983. Conspecific scent-trailing by newborn timber rattlesnakes, Crotalus horridus. Herpetologica 39, 430–436 [Google Scholar]
- 27.Brown W. S., Kery M., Hines J. E. 2007. Survival of timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus) estimated by capture–recapture models in relation to age, sex, color morph, time, and birthplace. Copeia 2007, 656–671 10.1643/0045-8511(2007)2007[656:SOTRCH]2.0.CO;2 (doi:10.1643/0045-8511(2007)2007[656:SOTRCH]2.0.CO;2) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Clark R. W. 2004. Kin recognition in rattlesnakes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271, S243–S245 10.1098/rsbl.2004.0162 (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2004.0162) [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Clark R. W. 2007. Public information for solitary foragers: timber rattlesnakes use conspecific chemical cues to select ambush sites. Behav. Ecol. 18, 487–490 10.1093/beheco/arm002 (doi:10.1093/beheco/arm002) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Shine R., Shine T., Shine J. M., Shine B. G. 2005. Synchrony in capture dates suggests cryptic social organization in sea snakes (Emydocephalus annulatus, Hydrophiidae). Aust. Ecol. 30, 805–811 10.1111/j.1442-9993.2005.01524.x (doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2005.01524.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Roth E. D., Lutterschmidt W. I. 2011. Experimental validation of sex differences in spatial behavior patterns of free-ranging snakes: implications for social interactions. Ethology 117, 852–858 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2011.01938.x (doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.2011.01938.x) [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Greene H. W., May P. G., Hardy D. L., Sciturro J. M., Farrell T. M. 2002. Parental behavior in vipers. In Biology of the vipers (eds Schuett G. W., Höggren M., Douglas M. E., Greene H. W.), pp. 179–205 Eagle Mountain, UT: Eagle Mountain Publishing [Google Scholar]
- 33.Pernetta A. P., Reading C. J., Allen J. A. 2009. Chemoreception and kin discrimination by neonate smooth snakes, Coronella austriaca. Anim. Behav. 77, 363–368 10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.10.008 (doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.10.008) [DOI] [Google Scholar]