Multiple predator effects on microdistributions, survival, and drift of stream hydropsychid caddisflies

Fairchild, Matthew P.; Holomuzki, Joseph R.

doi:10.1899/0887-3593(2005)024<0101:mpeoms>2.0.co;2

Cited by 26 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In many of these studies, a common prey type was faced with two predator species from different taxa, for example, snake and bird predators (Stapley 2004), fish and invertebrate predators (McIntosh and Peckarsky 1999;Turner et al 1999;Eklov and Werner 2000;Fairchild and Holomuzki 2005;and others), and fish and bird predators (Crowder et al 1997;Templeton and Shriner 2004). However, many prey species are also faced with multiple different predators from the same taxon, which may also exert different predation risks and thus elicit different antipredator responses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of different predator species on antipredator behavior in the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata

Botham

Kerfoot

Louca

et al. 2006

Naturwissenschaften

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different types of predators often elicit different antipredator responses in a common type of prey. Alternatively, some prey species may adopt a general response, which provides limited protection from many different types of predator. The Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata, is faced with a wide range of different predators throughout its range and is known to display varying levels of antipredator behavior depending on the predator assemblage. Pike cichlids, Crenicichla frenata, are regarded as the primary aquatic guppy predator in streams in the northern mountain range in Trinidad. As such, they are seen to be responsible for many of the differences in morphology, life history traits, and behavior between guppy populations from areas with few predators and those from areas with many pike cichlids. In this study we investigated how guppies responded when faced with different predator species using three common aquatic predators. We exposed shoals of ten guppies to one out of four treatments: no predator (control), pike cichlid, acara cichlid (Aequidens pulcher), and wolf fish (Hoplias malabaricus); and we made behavioral observations on both focal individuals and the shoal as a whole. Guppies showed significantly greater levels of predator inspection and shoaling behavior, foraged less, spent more time in the surface water, and stayed in significantly larger shoals when faced with pike cichlids than in other treatments. We discuss these results in the context of multiple predator effects.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of different predator species on antipredator behavior in the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata

Botham

Kerfoot

Louca

et al. 2006

Naturwissenschaften

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Matthaei et al (2000) found that after a flood event invertebrate densities on stable stones exceeded pre-disturbance levels. Some insect larvae can actively control their drifting behaviour and the distances over which they drift by, for example, bursts of swimming (Fairchild and Holomuzki 2005;James et al 2009;Oldmeadow et al 2010). Consequently, to avoid damage invertebrate animals may also have the ability to identify stable locations as refugia from sediment transport or to actively drift from the bed when sediment transport begins.…”

Section: Perception Of Sediment Transportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Animal perception in gravel-bed rivers: scales of sensing and environmental controls on sensory information

Johnson

Rice

2014

Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals make decisions based on the sensory information that they obtain from the environment and other organisms within that environment. In a river, this information is transported, transmitted, masked, and filtered by fluvial factors and processes, such as relative roughness and turbulent flow. By interpreting the resultant signals, animals decide on the suitability of habitat and their reaction to other organisms. While a great deal is known about the sensory biology of animals, only limited attention has been paid to the environmental controls on the propagation of sensory information within rivers. Here, the potential transport mechanisms and masking processes of the sensory information used by animals in gravel-bed rivers are assessed by considering how the physical nature of sensory signals are affected by river hydromorphology. In addition, the physical processes that animals have the potential to directly perceive are discussed. Understanding the environmental phenomena that animals directly perceive will substantially improve understanding of what controls animal distributions, shifting emphasis from identifying correlations between biotic and abiotic factors to a better appreciation of causation, with benefits for successful management.

show abstract

“…Peckarsky et al (2002) also demonstrate that larval mayflies that reside in a stream cohabitated by fish predators developed at a faster rate, resulting in smaller adult body size but decreased exposure to aquatic predators. Additional studies show that larval caddisflies increased rates of drift in the presence of predatory fish and plecopterans (Fairchild and Holomuzki, 2005) and increased the use of refuges when exposed to chemical cues from plecopteran predators (Gall and Brodie, 2009). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among aquatic insects, the behavioral and life-history responses of larval ephemeropterans (Malmqvist and Sjö ström, 1987;Peckarsky, 1996;Vance-Chalcraft et al, 2004) and trichopterans (Fairchild and Holomuzki, 2005;Gall and Brodie, 2009) have been especially well-documented. For instance, studies conducted in natural stream habitats show that larval ephemeropterans increase drifting behavior in response to stonefly (plecoptera) predators, especially at night (Malmqvist and Sjö strö m, 1987;Peckarsky, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Responses to short-term exposure to chemicals related to predation include altered stream drift patterns (McIntosh and Peckarsky, 1996;McIntosh et al, 2002), increased use of refuges (Vance-Chalcraft et al, 2004;Fairchild and Holomuzki, 2005) or decreased activity Gall and Brodie, 2009). Often these antipredator responses are associated with a reduction in foraging activity or food intake (Peckarsky, 1996;Vance-Chalcraft et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Antipredator Responses of Larval Black Flies (Simulium vittatum s. s.) to Chemical Stimuli from Damaged Conspecifics

Sullivan

Miedema

Hiers

et al. 2011

The American Midland Naturalist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple predator effects on microdistributions, survival, and drift of stream hydropsychid caddisflies

Cited by 26 publications

References 39 publications

The effects of different predator species on antipredator behavior in the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata

The effects of different predator species on antipredator behavior in the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata

Animal perception in gravel-bed rivers: scales of sensing and environmental controls on sensory information

Antipredator Responses of Larval Black Flies (Simulium vittatum s. s.) to Chemical Stimuli from Damaged Conspecifics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About