Replication data for "Try before you buy: Preferences for naturalistic-style enclosures are influenced by experience in bearded dragons (Pogona vitticeps)"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To ensure their welfare in captivity, reptiles are typically provided enclosures that aim to mimic their natural environment, as such enclosures may be preferred and better facilitate important behaviours. Research has frequently supported this principle, and has often found that reptiles’ preferences for naturalistic resources are innate. Regardless, it is critical to assess if the assumed benefits of such enclosures are realized; this may be especially pertinent for reptiles, given that the life histories of many species are not well known, making it unclear what “naturalistic” entails. Therefore, we used preference tests to examine the behaviour of bearded dragons (Pogona vitticeps) when allowed to freely interact with environments that were naturalistic or less complex (hereafter, standard). Lizards were randomly assigned to live in either naturalistic- or standard-style enclosures and swapped into the opposite style after 200 days. Preference tests were performed twice, occurring at least 100 days after lizards had lived in either enclosure style. In contrast to other work in reptiles, we found that a lizard’s experience influenced their behaviour: Lizards who were housed exclusively in standard-style enclosures when they were young spent more time with the style that they were familiar with when the preference test was performed, and, for all lizards, naturalistic-style enclosures were only preferred the second time the test was performed. Overall, these results suggest that familiarity may play an important role in the lizard’s preferences for naturalistic resources. Furthermore, the behaviour of lizards exclusively housed in standard-style enclosures when young could be indicative of neophobia induced by the relative low complexity of their rearing conditions, as has been observed in other vertebrates. Finally, because lizards only preferred naturalistic resources the second time the test was performed, these results may also suggest that the perceived value of naturalistic resources may have changed due to the timing of these tests, perhaps due to the lizard’s maturation or due to the season in which each test was performed. Regardless, all lizards used naturalistic resources more often to climb, dig, and hide, suggesting that these were superior for facilitating important, species-specific, motivated behaviours. In conclusion, these results demonstrate how a number of factors could influence a lizard’s perception of naturalistic resources and underscores how such resources may best facilitate important behaviours in P. vitticeps. Furthermore, these findings highlight the importance of assessing the assumed benefits of naturalistic enclosures and provide some practical recommendations for such assessments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.148 | 0.029 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".