Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Quatic Foraging in Garter Snakes: a Comparison of Specialists and Generalists

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Behaviour

To examine the assumption, underlying much ecological theory, that a "Jack-of-all-trades is master of none", a comparison was made of the aquatic predation of four colubrid snakes, two aquatic specialists (Thamnophis couchi, T. melanogaster) and two terrestrial-aquatic generalists (T. sirtalis, and T. elegans). Observations were made in the field, then juvenile snakes were compared under controlled laboratory conditions. The specialists and generalists had qualitatively different foraging repertoires. The specialists made lengthy dives, crawled slowly on the underwater substrate and made long-distance underwater responses to prey: orientation, approach, pursuit, and frontal attack. The generalists dived briefly, with rapid serpentine locomotion, or searched "terrestrially" by wandering along the shoreline and snatching prey from the water surface. Underwater, the generalists' only prey-directed response was sudden short-distance attack, and they appeared to rely on chance encounters with prey. There were significant differences between the two pairs. In comparison with the generalists, the specialists 1) captured more fish, 2) spent more time on aquatic search, 3) spent more aquatic search time diving, 4) spent more diving time on the underwater substrate, 5) made more attacks in every category of search in open water, and 6) attacked underwater from a greater distance. Significant differences were not found in attack frequencies in those search categories where underwater vision is probably unimportant (aerial attacks and attacks in underwater crevices), nor in aerial attack distances. The specialists' behavioral superiority in respect of their specialization supports the "Jack-of-all-trades" assumption. The observations suggest that this superiority is associated with superior underwater visual acuity (which may be due to superior visual accommodation). The generalists' principal underwater searching technique (serpentine diving) appears to be energetically costly, and may only be profitable when aquatic prey are especially vulnerable. Nerodia sipedon, member of a genus that is closely related to Thamnophis but more aquatic, had a foraging repertoire qualitatively similar to that of the generalists. The similarity may be associated with N. sipedon's nocturnal habits and presumed reliance on non-visual prey cues.

Affiliations: 1: Department of Psychology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, U.S.A.


Full text loading...


Data & Media loading...

Article metrics loading...



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    Behaviour — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation