No abstract

Summary 1. Environmental changes such as eutrophication and increasing inputs of humic matter (brownification) may have strong effects on predator–prey interactions in lakes through a reduction in the visual conditions affecting foraging behaviour of visually oriented predators. 2. In this experiment, we studied the effects of visual range (25–200 cm) in combination with optically deteriorating treatments (algae, clay or brown humic water) on predator–prey interactions between pike (Esox lucius) and roach (Rutilus rutilus). We measured effects on reaction distance and strike distance for pike and escape distance for roach, when pike individuals were exposed to free‐swimming roach as well as to roach held in a glass cylinder. 3. We found that reaction distance decreased with decreasing visual range caused by increasing levels of algae, clay or humic matter. The effect of reaction distance was stronger in turbid water (clay, algae) than in the brown water treatment. 4. Strike distance was neither affected by visual range nor by optical treatment, but we found shorter strike distances when pike attacked roach using visual cues only (roach held in a cylinder) compared to when pike could use multiple senses (free‐swimming roach). Escape distance for roach was longer in turbid than in brown water treatments. 5. Changes in environmental drivers, such as eutrophication and brownification, affecting the optical climate should thus have consequences for the strength of predator–prey interactions through changes in piscivore foraging efficiency and prey escape behaviour. This in turn may affect lake ecosystems through higher‐order interactions.

No abstract

Predators exert strong regulating forces on lower trophic levels through predation. As most fish are visual foragers, visual conditions in the water may alter the strength of this regulation. We evaluated effects of turbidity and humic water on foraging efficiency and prey-size selectivity in Northern pike (Esox lucius) feeding on roach (Rutilus rutilus). Encounter rates decreased in both turbid and humic water but were not counteracted by increased searching activity. Capture success was unaffected by turbidity but was nonlinearly affected by humic water by being high in clear and highly humic water but low in less humic water. In highly humic water, the visual range approached pike’s strike distance and, together with its cryptic colours, pike may have initiated its attack before the prey detected it, limiting the possibility for prey evasive manoeuvres. Prey-size selectivity towards small prey in clear water disappeared in turbid water but was maintained in humic water. Owing to its optical properties, turbidity degrades the quality of the visual information more through scattering than humic water does through absorption. We show that the effect of visual degradation on foraging depends on the cause of visual degradation, which has not previously been acknowledged in the visual foraging literature.

–  Fish, which are generally visual foragers, experiences reduced reaction distance in visually degraded environments, which has consequences for encounter rates with prey. Small prey is detected at shorter distances than larger prey, and piscivores are therefore predicted to be more strongly affected by visual degradation. In experiments, roach (Rutilus rutilus) were fed two plankton prey types and pike (Esox lucius) were fed Daphnia and larval roach, in clear water, algal turbid water and water coloured brown by dissolved organic matter (DOM). Planktivorous foraging in roach was not affected by visual degradation, while pike foraging on both Daphnia and larval roach was. Pike showed increased reaction distance to Daphnia in visually degraded water, while it was severely reduced with roach as prey even if the visual range was not reduced below pike reaction distances in clear water. Pike foraging on Daphnia was not affected, but when foraging on roach, the reduced search efficiency was counteracted by increased attack rates. However, there was no increase in movement and no difference between turbid and DOM treatments. Effects on piscivores will likely become more pronounced at later life stages as prey size and the reliance on long‐distance detection increases at the same time as changing climatic conditions may further deteriorate the visual conditions in future.