Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40175494›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Tokay geckos adjust their behaviour based on handler familiarity but according to context.

Isabel Damas-Moreira, Lauriane Bégué, Eva Ringler, Birgit Szabo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Isabel Damas-MoreiraDepartment of Behavioural Ecology, Faculty of Biology, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4630-3202
Lauriane BéguéDivision of Behavioural Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Wohlenstrasse 50a, Bern, 3032, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-3189-798X
Eva RinglerDivision of Behavioural Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Wohlenstrasse 50a, Bern, 3032, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3273-6568
Birgit SzaboDivision of Behavioural Ecology, Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Wohlenstrasse 50a, Bern, 3032, Switzerland. birgit.szabo@gmx.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3226-8621

Funding

German Research Foundation 502040958Swiss National Science Foundation 310030_197921University of Bern Open Round
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals need to recognize different individuals, both con- and heterospecifics, to make appropriate decisions. In the wild, responses to familiar individuals may vary depending on the context, which can be beneficial. However, differing responses towards human experimenters can influence experimental outcomes. Such effects might be particularly overlooked in reptiles which are frequently viewed as cognitively less advanced. We tested Tokay geckos' (Gekko gecko) ability to distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar handlers in two situations: in a novel situation (exerting physical constraint) and a routine situation (feeding from forceps as during regular husbandry). Geckos showed sex-specific differences towards familiar and unfamiliar handlers in a routine situation, but not in a novel situation, in which they showed individual repeatability. Our results further advance our understanding of reptile cognition revealing important insights into context specific responses in relation to handler identity with implications for experimental animal studies that are rarely considered.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalLizardsRecognition, PsychologyAnimalsCognitionFemaleHumansMaleDeath feigningFeedingPersonalityReptileSquamataTonic immobility

Identifiers

PMID40175494
PMCPMC11965329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.