Do differences in exploration and boldness inform species level responses to environmental change in montane chipmunks?

How animals behave in novel situations may significantly affect multiple aspects of their biology, including how they respond to environmental change. Two aspects of behaviour that are often used to assess interactions with new environments are exploration and boldness. Within species, variation in these responses to novelty is thought to reflect differences in individual behavioural phenotypes (e.g. behavioural syndromes). Between species, these responses may be influenced by the degree of ecological specialization, with members of more specialized taxa typically expected to display a reduced tendency to interact with novel habitats. To test the prediction that more ecologically specialized species are more neophobic, we used open-field assays to compare exploratory behaviour and boldness among free-living members of two partially sympatric species of chipmunks from the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California, U.S.A.: the lodgepole chipmunk, Tamias speciosus , a habitat generalist, and the alpine chipmunk, Tamias alpinus , a habitat specialist. Our analyses indicate that while behavioural measures of boldness did not differ between these species, individual T. speciosus were on average more exploratory than individual T. alpinus . Although the number of individuals tested per species was limited, these findings have important implications for understanding reported interspecific differences in elevational range shifts in response to changing environmental conditions in the Sierra Nevada. More generally, our analyses underscore the potential importance of behavioural responses to novelty in shaping species level patterns of response to environmental change. • We examine whether more ecologically specialized species are more neophobic. • We compare boldness, exploration and activity of a generalist and specialist chipmunk. • Generalists were more exploratory but not bolder than specialists. • These two responses to novelty were not necessarily correlated in our study.