Biol. Rev. (2015), pp. 000–000. 1 doi: 10.1111/brv.12173 Fifty years of chasing lizards: new insights advance optimal escape theory Diogo S. M. Samia 1∗ , Daniel T. Blumstein 2 , Theodore Stankowich 3 and William E. Cooper Jr. 4 1 Laboratory of Theoretical Ecology and Synthesis, Federal University of Goiás, CP. 131, 74001-970 Goiânia, Brazil 2 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, 621 Young Drive South, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1606, U.S.A. 3 Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, 1250 Belllower Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90840, U.S.A. 4 Department of Biology, Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne, Fort Wayne, IN 46835, U.S.A. ABSTRACT Systematic reviews and meta-analyses often examine data from diverse taxa to identify general patterns of effect sizes. Meta-analyses that focus on identifying generalisations in a single taxon are also valuable because species in a taxon are more likely to share similar unique constraints. We conducted a comprehensive phylogenetic meta-analysis of light initiation distance in lizards. Flight initiation distance (FID) is a common metric used to quantify risk-taking and has previously been shown to relect adaptive decision-making. The past decade has seen an explosion of studies focused on quantifying FID in lizards, and, because lizards occur in a wide range of habitats, are ecologically diverse, and are typically smaller and differ physiologically from the better studied mammals and birds, they are worthy of detailed examination. We found that variables that relect the costs or beneits of light (being engaged in social interactions, having food available) as well as certain predator effects (predator size and approach speed) had large effects on FID in the directions predicted by optimal escape theory. Variables that were associated with morphology (with the exception of crypsis) and physiology had relatively small effects, whereas habitat selection factors typically had moderate to large effect sizes. Lizards, like other taxa, are very sensitive to the costs of light. Key words: antipredator behaviour, escape behaviour, escape distance, light initiation distance, lizards, meta-analysis, optimal escape theory, phylogenetic meta-analysis. CONTENTS I. Introduction .................................................................................................... 2 II. Methods ......................................................................................................... 3 (1) Literature survey ........................................................................................... 3 (2) Estimating effect sizes ..................................................................................... 3 (3) Analyses ..................................................................................................... 4 III. Results ............................................................................................................ 5 (1) Comparison between categories of effects ............................................................. 5 (2) Predatory effects ........................................................................................... 5 (3) Habitat selection effects .................................................................................. 6 (4) Cost of leeing effects ..................................................................................... 6 (5) Physiological and morphological effects ............................................................... 7 (6) Experiential effects ........................................................................................ 7 (7) Correlation with other escape responses ............................................................... 7 IV. Discussion ....................................................................................................... 8 (1) Predatory effects ........................................................................................... 8 * Address for correspondence (Tel: +55 62 35211203; E-mail: diogosamia@gmail.com). Biological Reviews (2015) 000–000 © 2015 Cambridge Philosophical Society