DOI: 10.5061/dryad.rbnzs7hj7
title: A field experiment reveals reciprocal effects of host personality and parasitism in wild lizards

description: Host behavior and parasite infection reciprocally interact, but this
 dynamic is rarely studied experimentally in the field with multiple
 behaviors. Using the dataset provided here, we investigated the interplay
 between parasitism and host behavior via an in situ experimental
 tick infestation of a wild population of sleepy lizards, Tiliqua rugosa.
 Using Bayesian models, we assessed the relationship between experimental
 infestation and lizard aggression and boldness before and after
 infestation. First, we tested whether lizard aggression and boldness prior
 to infestation predicted the probability of tick attachment in the
 infestation experiment. Second, we evaluated whether experimental
 infestation affected subsequent lizard aggression and boldness. We found
 that aggression and boldness related interactively with infestation: for
 unaggressive lizards, higher boldness was associated with reduced
 experimental infestation success, but the opposite occurred for aggressive
 individuals. Second, increased tick infestation did not affect
 post-infestation aggression, but tended to increase boldness. Taken
 together, these results highlight the potential for feedbacks between
 parasites and multi-dimensional host behaviors.
description: For details on the dataset, please see the provided ReadMe as
 well as the manuscript for which this dataset was originally published
 (Payne et al., Behavioral Ecology, <em>A field experiment reveals
 reciprocal effects of host personality and parasitism in wild
 lizards</em>).
description: # ReadMe Summary This ReadMe describes the data and its columns. The
 dataset contains two files, "behavior\_data.csv" and
 "randomization\_parameter\_estimates.csv". The former file
 includes the infestation, lizard behavior, and lizard trait data used in
 Payne et al., *A field experiment reveals reciprocal effects of host
 personality and parasitism in wild lizards* (Behavioral Ecology). The
 latter file contains the model parameter estimates produced by the
 randomization procedure described in the aforementioned manuscript
 (described briefly below). # Description of columns in behavior\_data.csv
 * Lizard: the unique individual to which the focal observation (the
 current row) refers. * year: the calendar year of the focal observation *
 date: date in MM/DD/YYYY on which the current behavioral trial was
 performed * Aggression: the lizard's aggression score. Ranked on a
 1-11 scale. * This scale is described in "Godfrey et al. 2012. Lovers
 and fighters in sleepy lizard land: where do aggressive males fit in a
 social network? Animal Behavior." See Table 1. * Boldness: the
 lizard's banana boldness score, on a 1-7 rank. This score reflected a
 lizard's response to a banana (a preferred food item) in a perceived
 situation of risk. See Payne et al. manuscript (mentioned above) for more
 details. * sex: lizard sex. 0 is Female and 1 is Male. NA individuals had
 indeterminate sex. * avgmass: the lizard's average mass for a given
 year (thus, for a given lizard, average mass will be the same for all
 observations within a single year). Provided in grams. NA value indicates
 no mass was recorded (happened for one lizard). * trialnum: the trial
 number within season of the behavioral observation. Lizards typically
 received aggression and boldness assays three times per season. This trial
 number refers to these within season trials (a lizard's first,
 second, third, etc. trial within season). * date\_infected: the date on
 which infestation treatment lizards were infested. Only present so that
 the reader can confirm that all infestation treatments occurred on a
 lizard's first behavioral trial of a season. NA value indicates that
 a lizard was part of the "no\_treatment" experimental
 infestation group (i.e., not experimentally infected and not used as a
 control; control lizards experienced the same treatment as the infected
 lizards, except ticks were not added to the control lizards). *
 ticksAdded: the number of *Bothriocroton hydrosauri* that were added to
 each infestation lizard during the infestation treatment. Note that each
 lizard received larvae from a distinct genetic line (i.e., a different
 mother). NA value indicates that ticks were not experimentally added to a
 lizard (treatment will be "no\_treatment" or
 "no\_infestation" for such rows). * ticksOnLizard: the number of
 B. hydrosauri larvae that successfully attached to a lizard during the
 infestation treatment. NA value indicates that ticks were not
 experimentally added to a lizard (treatment will be
 "no\_treatment" or "no\_infestation" for such rows). *
 Treatment: a lizard's infestation treatment. One of:
 "no\_treatment," "no\_infestation," and
 "infestation." * "no\_treatment" lizards experienced
 no manipulation of any kind. * "no\_infestation" lizards
 experienced the same treatment as infestation lizards, except the
 no\_infestation lizards did not receive any ticks. *
 "infestation" lizards received the larvae addition treatment. *
 Note that these categorical descriptors were constant within a lizard
 throughout a given season. For example, lizard 2408 was an infestation
 lizard in 2016. This lizard (like all infestation lizards) experienced
 it's first behavioral assay and the infestation treatment on the same
 day, but the infestation treatment occurred AFTER the behavioral assay.
 Thus, though 2408's first behavioral observation in 2016 (September
 22, 2016) has a treatment listed as "infestation," 2408 had not
 actually experienced the infestation treatment at the time of this first
 behavioral assay. * avgbothNymph\_Larva: this column records accumulated
 average (larvae + nymph) tick counts. Throughout the season, we counted
 lizards' ticks roughly every two weeks, noting the number of larval,
 nymph, and adult ticks. To derive the accumulated tick average metric, we
 averaged a lizard's tick counts from these bi-weekly counts up to
 (inclusive) the current trial. However, note that we used the sum of a
 lizard's larvae + nymphs within a count observation. Thus, if a
 lizard had two tick counts before its first behavioral trial and one tick
 count on the day of the trial, the larvae + nymph tick counts from each of
 these observations would be averaged. For trial 2, tick counts from the
 start of the season through trial 2's date would be averaged, and so
 on for trial 3. NA value indicates that ticks were never counted for a
 lizard (happened once for a lizard that was not an adult and excluded from
 the study). * For example, if a lizard had the following tick counts
 (larvae/nymph/adult) at four different counting dates: 10/1/2, 5/0/2,
 1/1/0, and 10/2/0. * If trial 1 occurred the same day as the lizard's
 second tick count, and trial 2 occurred the same day as the lizard's
 fourth tick count, then avgbothNymph\_Larva at trial 1 and 2 would be: *
 trial 1 would be: [(10+1) + (5+0)]/2 * trial 2 would be: [(10+1) + (5+0) +
 (1+1) + (10+2)]/4 * avgtotal: this column records accumulated average tick
 counts, as described above, but for all tick stages (larvae + nymph +
 adult). NA value indicates that ticks were never counted for a lizard
 (happened once for a lizard that was not an adult and excluded from the
 study). * Using the same data as the example above, the avgtotal value at
 trial 1 and 2 would be: * trial 1 would be: [(10+1+2) + (5+0+2)]/2 *
 avgtotal for trial 2 would be: [(10+1+2) + (5+0+2) + (1+1+0) + (10+2+0)]/4
 Note: For the models analyzing the relationship between pre-infestation
 behavior and infestation success, note that the six observations for
 lizard 40044 were not used. In 2017, this lizard had an outlier
 pre-infestation tick count (149, versus all other lizards had 20 or
 fewer). To be conservative, we did not use the data from this lizard for
 either 2016 or 2017. However, the observations from this lizard *were*
 used in the models that assessed the effect of ticks on lizard behavior. #
 Description of columns in randomization\_parameter\_estimates.csv In the
 manuscript referenced earlier, the authors predicted the success of an
 experimental infestation treatment with the host animal's behavior
 prior to treatment (as well as a few other predictors). Because the
 infestation treatment used a limited number of animals, a randomization
 was conducted in which the observed treatment success was randomized with
 respect to the predictors. Ten thousand randomized datasets were
 generated, and for each one, a model was run evaluating the relationship
 between the predictors and the (now randomized) infestation success. For
 each of these 10,000 models, the parameter effect estimates were extracted
 and saved into the "randomization\_parameter\_estimates.csv"
 file. * Intercept: the model intercept * year: the parameter effect for
 year, which was treated as a factor (rather than linear) with default set
 to 2016 * sex: the parameter effect for sex, which was treated as a factor
 with default set to female * avgmass\_z: the parameter effect for a
 lizard's average mass in a year * Aggression\_z: the parameter effect
 for aggression, which was standardized (subtract mean and then divide by
 standard deviation) prior to use in models * Boldness\_z: the parameter
 effect for boldness, which was standardized (subtract mean and then divide
 by standard deviation) prior to use in models *
 Aggression\_by\_Boldness\_z: the parameter effect for the interaction
 between aggression and boldness