Back

Reassessing display behavior from Bels et al. (2025) given the complexity of anthropogenic hybridization and intraspecific diversity in Iguana iguana

van den Burg, M. P.; Thibaudier, J.

2026-03-23 zoology
10.64898/2026.03.19.713079 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Understanding behavioral differences between non-native and closely related endangered species could be important to aid conservation management. In volume 169 of Zoology, Bels et al. (2025) reported on their comparison of display-action-patterns (DAP) between native Iguana delicatissima and non-native iguanas present on islands of the Guadeloupe Archipelago in the Caribbean Lesser Antilles. Here, we address conceptual and methodological concerns about their work and reanalyze their data given our proposed corrections, primarily a literature-informed adjustment of their "species" category. We additionally utilize online videos from South American mainland I. iguana populations, from where the non-native iguanas in the Guadeloupe Archipelago originate, to better understand the different DAPs between native and non-native iguanas in the Guadeloupe Archipelago. Significant differences in DAP characteristics among "species" categories (native I. delicatissima, non-native iguanas, and hybrids) show that Bels et al. (2025) oversimplified their data analyses by merging all non-native populations into one group. This result indicates the presence of behavioral variation among subpopulations within widely hybridizing iguanid populations, which has been poorly studied. Additionally, videos from mainland populations across two major mitochondrial clades of Iguana iguana show that non-native iguanas on Guadeloupe retained DAP characteristics of those populations from which they originate. We discuss these findings in light of the proposed hypotheses put forward by Bels et al. (2025), of which two can be excluded. Overall, our reanalysis shows that studies focusing on characteristics within settings of complex hybridization in diverse species should acknowledge this complexity.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
2
Animal Conservation
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
3
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
8.5%
4
American Journal of Primatology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
5
Global Ecology and Conservation
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.3%
6
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
4.9%
7
Conservation Science and Practice
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
9
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
10
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
11
Biological Conservation
43 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
12
Journal of Fish Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
13
Landscape Ecology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
14
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.7%
15
Insects
36 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
16
Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
17
Biotropica
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
18
Journal of Heredity
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
19
Ethology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
20
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.0%
21
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.0%
22
Biological Invasions
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.0%
23
The American Naturalist
114 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
24
Journal of Biogeography
37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
25
Integrative Organismal Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
26
Frontiers in Marine Science
55 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
27
Biology Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
29
Systematic Entomology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
30
Ecosphere
53 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%