Environmental context elicits behavioural modification of collective state in schooling fish

Rodriguez-Pinto, Ivan; Rieucau, Guillaume; Handegard, Nils Olav; Boswell, Kevin M.

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2020.05.002

Cited by 24 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Individual prey in groups vary in multiple aspects of how they appear to predators, including their direction and speed, and how variable such parameters are over time and between individuals. Group-level variables are also diverse, such as the group's shape, the spatial arrangement of individuals and the degree to which individuals change position within the group [31][32][33][34], which can depend on species and ecological context [35][36][37] and also vary over time within the same group and context [24,38]. Given our results with groups which differed only with respect to their directional movement, multidimensional variation in individual and collective properties of prey may make it difficult to generalize which measure of spatial position accurately predicts the risk of prey being targeted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The measure of spatial position within groups that best predicts predation risk depends on group movement

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both empirical and theoretical studies show that an individual's spatial position within a group can impact the risk of being targeted by predators. Spatial positions can be quantified in numerous ways, but there are no direct comparisons of different spatial measures in predicting the risk of being targeted by real predators. Here, we assess these spatial measures in groups of stationary and moving virtual prey being attacked by three-spined sticklebacks ( Gasterosteus aculeatus ). In stationary groups, the limited domain of danger best predicted the likelihood of attack. In moving groups, the number of near neighbours was the best predictor but only over a limited range of distances within which other prey were counted. Otherwise, measures of proximity to the group's edge outperformed measures of local crowding in moving groups. There was no evidence that predators preferentially attacked the front or back of the moving groups. Domains of danger without any limit, as originally used in the selfish herd model, were also a poor predictor of risk. These findings reveal that the collective properties of prey can influence how spatial position affects predation risk, via effects on predators' targeting. Selection may therefore act differently on prey positioning behaviour depending on group movement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The measure of spatial position within groups that best predicts predation risk depends on group movement

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Being a member of a group can provide many benefits (Ward & Webster, 2016), but most species of fish do not blindly form groups. Fish are able to differentiate between individuals and actively moderate the composition of their groups (Ward et al ., 2020) and habitat complexity can, in turn, have a strong effect on social behaviour (Rodriguez‐Pinto et al ., 2020). The benefit of social enrichment and preferred group sizes is species‐specific (Saxby et al ., 2010) and can depend on the level of sociality of a species.…”

Section: Towards a More Refined Understanding Of Pementioning

confidence: 99%

Physical enrichment research for captive fish: Time to focus on the DETAILS

Jones

Webster

Salvanes

2021

Journal of Fish Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Growing research effort has shown that physical enrichment (PE) can improve fish welfare and research validity. However, the inclusion of PE does not always result in positive effects and conflicting findings have highlighted the many nuances involved. Effects are known to depend on species and life stage tested, but effects may also vary with differences in the specific items used as enrichment between and within studies. Reporting fine‐scale characteristics of items used as enrichment in studies may help to reveal these factors. We conducted a survey of PE‐focused studies published in the last 5 years to examine the current state of methodological reporting. The survey results suggest that some aspects of enrichment are not adequately detailed. For example, the amount and dimensions of objects used as enrichment were frequently omitted. Similarly, the ecological relevance, or other justification, for enrichment items was frequently not made explicit. Focusing on ecologically relevant aspects of PE and increasing the level of detail reported in studies may benefit future work and we propose a framework with the acronym DETAILS (Dimensions, Ecological rationale, Timing of enrichment, Amount, Inputs, Lighting and Social environment). We outline the potential importance of each of the elements of this framework with the hope it may aid in the level of reporting and standardization across studies, ultimately aiding the search for more beneficial types of PE and the development of our understanding and ability to improve the welfare of captive fish and promote more biologically relevant behaviour.

show abstract

“…Animal groups vary in multiple aspects of their collective properties, such as the degree of directional movement, group shape, the spatial arrangement of individuals and the degree to which individuals change position within the group [30][31][32][33]. This can depend on species and ecological context [34][35][36], but can also vary over time within the same group and context [37,23]. Given our results with groups which differed only with respect to their directional movement, multidimensional variation in collective properties of prey may make it difficult to generalise which measure of spatial position accurately predicts the risk of prey being targeted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The measure of spatial position within groups that best predicts predation risk depends on group movement

Lambert

Herbert‐Read

Ioannou

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both empirical and theoretical studies show that an individual's spatial position within a group can impact the risk of being targeted by predators. Spatial positions can be quantified in numerous ways, but there are no direct comparisons of different spatial measures in predicting the risk of being targeted by real predators. Here we assess these spatial measures in groups of stationary and moving virtual prey being attacked by three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). In stationary groups, the limited domain of danger best predicted the likelihood of attack. In moving groups, the number of near neighbours was the best predictor but only over a limited range of distances within which other prey were counted. Otherwise, measures of proximity to the group's edge outperformed measures of local crowding in moving groups. There was no evidence that predators preferentially attacked the front or back of the moving groups. Domains of danger without any limit, as originally used in the selfish herd model, were also a poor predictor of risk. These findings reveal that the collective properties of prey can influence how spatial position affects predation risk, via effects on predators' targeting, hence selection may act differently on prey positioning behaviour depending on group movement.

show abstract

Environmental context elicits behavioural modification of collective state in schooling fish

Cited by 24 publications

References 60 publications

The measure of spatial position within groups that best predicts predation risk depends on group movement

The measure of spatial position within groups that best predicts predation risk depends on group movement

Physical enrichment research for captive fish: Time to focus on the DETAILS

The measure of spatial position within groups that best predicts predation risk depends on group movement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About