Individual (co)variation of field behavior and locomotor performance in curly tailed lizards K. Diamond 1 , D. Trovillion 2 , K. E. Allen 3 , K. M. Malela 4 , D. A. Noble 5 , R. Powell 6 , D. A. Eifler 7 & M. E. Gifford 8 1 Department of Biology, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA 2 Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA 3 Department of Biology, Truman State University, Kirksville, MO, USA 4 Department of Environmental Health, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana 5 Department of Biology, Hendrix College, Conway, AR, USA 6 Department of Biology, Avila University, Kansas City, MO, USA 7 Erell Institute, Lawrence, KS, USA 8 Department of Biology, University of Central Arkansas, Conway, AR, USA Keywords honest signaling; individual gambit; behavioral syndrome; repeatability; Leiocephalus carinatus. Correspondence Matthew E. Gifford, Department of Biology, University of Central Arkansas, 201 Donaghey Ave., Conway, AR 72035, USA. Email: megifford@uca.edu Editor: Nigel Bennett Received 25 June 2014; revised 6 August 2014; accepted 12 August 2014 doi:10.1111/jzo.12175 Abstract Animal communication among competitors often relies on honest signaling such that displays of aggression accurately reflect an individual’s performance abilities. Moreover, the maintenance of honest signaling should be enhanced by the existence of consistent individual differences in behavior and performance, and individual-level correlations between them. Despite this, researchers studying honest signaling rarely measure behavioral repeatability. Here, we demonstrate that field behaviors of free-ranging lizards and a measure of locomotor perfor- mance in the laboratory are consistent among individuals (i.e. they were repeat- able), although the magnitude of repeatability varies among traits. In addition, endurance appears to be correlated with display frequency in the field at the individual level, suggesting that display frequency is an honest signal of endur- ance. Interestingly, this correlation was strong for males, and non-existent for females. Our results extend previous studies of behavior–performance relation- ships by identifying a sex-specific correlation between traits and by partitioning phenotypic correlations into between- and within-individual components. This analytical approach is emerging as a powerful tool for studying individual vari- ation in behavior and physiology. Introduction Laboratory measurements of physiological performance are used frequently to understand and predict how organisms interact with their environment and to provide a functional perspective for interpreting the fitness consequences of mor- phological variation (Arnold, 1983; Wainwright & Reilly, 1994). Arnold’s (1983) landmark paper set up a framework for measuring selection on morphological traits in two steps: the first measures the effects of morphological variation on per- formance and the second measures the effects of performance on fitness. Since this time, researchers have expanded and modified the morphology-performance-fitness framework to consider how behavior might be included in this framework (Garland & Losos, 1984; Irschick & Losos, 1998; Husak & Fox, 2006). The relationship between performance (e.g. loco- motion, bite force) and behavior is important in the context of honest signaling, in which certain behaviors (movements, pos- tures, sounds) involved in agonistic and sexual interactions are thought to indicate reliable information about the signaler with regard to, for example, fighting capacity, energy reserves or fitness (Zahavi, 1975, 1977; Leal, 1999; Keyser & Hill, 2000; Akçay et al., 2011; Lailvaux, Gilbert & Edwards, 2012). Animal behavior was traditionally considered highly plastic and quickly responsive to an organism’s physiological state and environmental context (Emlen, 1966; Stephens & Krebs, 1986). Contrary to this view, researchers have increasingly demonstrated that behaviors are often quite consistent among individuals, even across different contexts (both in the labora- tory and in the field, reviewed in Bell, Hankison & Laskowski, 2009); observations that have led to the development of a considerable literature on behavioral syndromes and animal personalities (Koolhaas et al., 1999; Gosling, 2001; Sih, Bell & Johnson, 2004; Reale et al., 2007). Despite the rapid Journal of Zoology Journal of Zoology. Print ISSN 0952-8369 248 Journal of Zoology 294 (2014) 248–254 © 2014 The Zoological Society of London