Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on June 19, 2006
Behavioral Ecology 2006 17(5):857-872; doi:10.1093/beheco/arl010
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Review |
The costs of autotomy and regeneration in animals: a review and framework for future research
Division of Biological Sciences, The University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, USA
Address correspondednce to T.L. Maginnis, who is now at St Edward's University, Biology Department, Austin, TX 78704, USA. E-mail: taram{at}stedwards.edu.
Many organisms have the ability to shed an appendage (autotomy) to escape a predator or fouled molting event. Despite its immediate advantage on survivorship, autotomy can have important consequences for locomotion, foraging, survivorship, and/or reproduction. Thus, regeneration is a way that animals alleviate some of the costs associated with losing an appendage. Like autotomy, however, appendage regeneration can have important consequences for a variety of aspects of fitness; in a wide range of amphibians, reptiles, fishes, and arthropods, the allocation of resources to regenerate a lost appendage negatively affects somatic or reproductive growth. Previous research into the costs associated with regeneration has provided a strong framework to explore how trade-offs associated with regeneration may have influenced its evolution. However, all research to date describing the costs and benefits associated with autotomy and regeneration have compared individuals autotomizing and regenerating an appendage with individuals that have never lost an appendage. I suggest that for studies of the evolutionary significance of regeneration, an alternative comparison is between individuals experiencing autotomy without regeneration and individuals experiencing autotomy with regeneration. Future work in this direction promises new insights into the evolution of regenerative tendencies, as well as how regeneration may be influencing animal form and function.
Key words: autotomy, costs, evolution, regeneration, trade-offs.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  T. E. Higham and A. P. Russell Flip, flop and fly: modulated motor control and highly variable movement patterns of autotomized gecko tails Biol Lett, September 9, 2009; (2009) rsbl.2009.0577v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. B. Gillis, L. A. Bonvini, and D. J. Irschick Losing stability: tail loss and jumping in the arboreal lizard Anolis carolinensis J. Exp. Biol., March 1, 2009; 212(5): 604 - 609. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. M. While, T. Uller, and E. Wapstra Family conflict and the evolution of sociality in reptiles Behav. Ecol., March 1, 2009; 20(2): 245 - 250. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. M. Wrinn and G. W. Uetz Effects of autotomy and regeneration on detection and capture of prey in a generalist predator Behav. Ecol., November 1, 2008; 19(6): 1282 - 1288. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|