Cue reduction or general cue masking do not underlie generalized chemical camouflage in pirate perch

Resetarits, William J.; Breech, Tyler M.; Bohenek, Jason R.; Pintar, Matthew R.

doi:10.1002/ecy.3625

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 97 publications

(170 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result is at odds with the idea that ambush predators uniformly have more reliable cues and stronger predation‐risk effects on prey than active predators (Preisser et al, 2007). It also adds evidence to the hypothesis that pirate perch are cryptic to prey at both the colonization stage (Resetarits Jr. et al, 2021; Resetarits Jr. & Binckley, 2013; Resetarits Jr. & Pintar, 2016) and post‐colonization stage (here). Free‐roaming golden topminnows had an intermediate effect and all caged fish had no effect on mole salamander survival.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

“…Both larval amphibians and ovipositing adults may not be able to sense pirate perch because they are chemically camouflaged, which is defined as an adaptation to modify or conceal chemical cues so as to be misidentified or remain undetected (Resetarits Jr. & Binckley, 2013;Ruxton, 2009). Pirate perch also appear to be chemically camouflaged to dispersing aquatic coleopterans and hemipterans and to ovipositing mosquitoes and gray treefrogs (Binckley & Resetarits Jr., 2003;Binckley & Resetarits Jr., 2005;Resetarits Jr. & Binckley, 2013;Resetarits Jr. et al 2022;Silberbush & Resetarits Jr., 2017) and, based on this experiment, to larval gray treefrogs and mole salamanders in the aquatic environment. These disparate taxonomic groups show highly convergent veha However, while the divergent effects of pirate perch in this study may be attributable to chemical camouflage, there were still trace risk-induced trait responses to freeroaming pirate perch (Figure 1a,c,d), suggesting that chemical camouflage is imperfect or some additional mechanism may be operating, such as conspecific alarm signals.…”

Section: Predator-naïve Prey or Chemically Camouflaged Predator?mentioning

confidence: 83%

“…They will also opportunistically consume decapods, small fish, and amphibians (reviewed in Burr, 2020); however, their effectiveness as a predator and actual prey consumption rates are unknown, and they may feed infrequently like their closest relatives, the amblyopsid cavefishes (Dillman et al, 2011; Parker & Simco, 2006). It is hypothesized that pirate perch are chemically camouflaged toward prey as they are undetectable to colonizing insects and gray treefrogs that typically avoid predatory fishes (Binckley & Resetarits Jr., 2003; Binckley & Resetarits Jr., 2005; Resetarits Jr. et al, 2022; Resetarits Jr. & Binckley, 2013; Silberbush & Resetarits Jr., 2017).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While many breeding amphibians show a general preference for fishless habitats, they either ignore or fail to detect pirate perch ( Aphredoderus sayanus ), a cryptic ambush predator hypothesized to employ chemical camouflage (Resetarits Jr. et al, 2022; Resetarits Jr. & Binckley, 2013). Motivated by known responses of amphibians to fish during the colonization stage (Resetarits Jr. & Binckley, 2013), we tested hypotheses regarding consumptive and predation‐risk effects of varied fish predators on larval amphibians in the post‐colonization stage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A wolf in sheep's clothing: Predatory fish have convergent consumptive effects but divergent predation‐risk effects

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although consumptive effects of predators have long been central to ecology, predation‐risk effects have emerged as major components of predator–prey interactions. Both consumptive and predation‐risk effects should vary with predator functional traits (e.g., hunting mode, gape size), where consumption rates and induction of morphological and behavioral defenses correlate with prey‐specific predator threat. Ambush predators, in contrast with active predators, may face selection pressure to be cryptic to avoid detection by prey. Thus, ambush predators may change prey density through consumptive effects but have reduced or absent predationrisk effects. We performed two mesocosm experiments with free‐roaming and caged predators to explore post‐colonization interactions of the chemically camouflaged, large‐gaped, ambush predator, pirate perch (Aphredoderus sayanus), active, large‐gaped green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus), and active, small‐gaped golden topminnow (Fundulus chrysotus), with larval gray treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis) and mole salamanders (Ambystoma talpoideum). We examined the consumptive and predation‐risk effects of each predator on amphibian mortality, growth rates, tail morphology, and polyphenisms. Large‐gaped pirate perch and green sunfish had strong, equivalent consumptive effects, but only the free‐roaming active predator, green sunfish, suppressed the growth of survivors through risk‐induced trait responses. Caged green sunfish induced much stronger non‐consumptive mortality than pirate perch in gray treefrogs, an effect that was absent for mole salamanders; golden topminnows had intermediate effects. Tail defenses were a function of prey mortality and only manifested in free‐roaming predator treatments, suggesting the necessity of predator attacks or conspecific alarm signals. Likewise, mole salamander polyphenism was unaffected by caged predators, whereas free‐roaming green sunfish prevented all metamorphosis. Free‐roaming golden topminnows increased the proportion of individuals remaining as larvae, and pirate perch increased the proportion of paedomorphs and metamorphs. Overall, the prey had positively correlated anti‐predator responses across life stages, suggesting multicomponent defenses. Predator effects varied with functional traits with large‐gaped predators having strong consumptive effects, but active predators causing stronger risk‐induced changes in growth compared to cryptic ambush predators, which provides more evidence for chemical camouflage. Our results emphasize the role of hunting mode and gape size in determining consumptive and predation‐risk effects, and that predation‐risk effects cannot be reliably predicted from consumptive effects.

show abstract