Predator-driven intra-species variation in locomotion, metabolism and water velocity preference in pale chub (Zacco platypus) along a river

Abstract

Fish inhabit environments that vary greatly in terms of predation intensity, and these predation regimes are generally expected to be a major driver of divergent natural selection. To test whether there is predator-driven intra-species variation in the locomotion, metabolism and water velocity preference of pale chub (Zacco platypus) along a river, we measured unsteady and steady swimming and water velocity preference among fish collected from both high-and lowpredation habitats in the Wujiang River. We also measured the routine metabolic rate (RMR), maximum metabolic rate (MMR) and cost of transport (COT) and calculated the optimal swimming speed (U opt ). The fish from the high-predation populations showed a shorter response latency, elevated routine metabolism, lower swimming efficiency at low swimming speed and lower water velocity preference compared with those from the low-predation populations. Neither of the kinematic parameters fast-start and critical swimming speed (U crit ) showed a significant difference between the high-and low-predation populations. The fish from the high-predation populations may improve their predator avoidance capacity primarily through an elevated routine metabolism and shorter response latency to achieve advanced warning and escape, rather than an improved fast-start swimming speed or acceleration. Thus, the cost of this strategy is an elevated RMR, and no trade-off between unsteady and steady swimming performance was observed in the pale chub population under various predation stresses. It was interesting to find that the high-predation fish showed an unexpected lower velocity preference, which might represent a compromise between predation avoidance, foraging and energy saving.

Flowing water affects fish fast-starts: escape performance of the Hawaiian stream goby,Sicyopterus stimpsoni

“…Many studies have found limited responses of fast-start velocity to a variety of changing conditions (Feitl et al, 2010;Fu et al, 2015). Because the movement of water from the jet stimulus was not visible, it was not possible to evaluate response latency in this study, but further trials (e.g.…”

“…Fast-starts can be triggered by various stimuli, including visual sensory input (Eaton et al, 1977;Hale, 2002) and mechanical stimulation of the lateral line system (Stewart et al, 2013(Stewart et al, , 2014. Many aspects of fish biology can affect fast-start performance, including morphology (Law and Blake, 1996;Webb, 1976), developmental stage (Hale, 1996(Hale, , 1999, behavior (Bohórquez-Herrera et al, 2013;Eaton et al, 1977) and physiology (Abrahams et al, 2007;Fu et al, 2015;Hale, 2002).…”

“…Although some aspects of fast-start performance in fishes have been found to be independent of certain external factors (Binning et al, 2014;Fu et al, 2015), other fast-start variables have shown context dependency (Domenici, 2010a), and recent studies have indicated that viewing fast-starts as fixed actions is too simple (Abrahams et al, 2007;Domenici, 2010b;Marras et al, 2011;Tytell and Lauder, 2008). Studies of the black goby showed that fish react proportionally to the perceived strength of a stimulus (Turesson et al, 2009).…”

Selection on the morphology–physiology‐performance nexus: Lessons from freshwater stickleback morphs

“…In both cases, the amount of energy required for maintenance of basic biological functions is expected to be under strong directional selection: because high SMR would increase the need for increased nutritional input, concomitant increases in foraging would be tantamount to increased risk‐taking behavior, thereby reducing survival probability in the strong predator regime (Huntingford et al., 2010; Killen, Marras, & McKenzie, 2011; Mueller & Diamond, 2001). Similar “context‐dependent” patterns in forming an optimum SMR have been observed in several populations of Trinidadian guppy from high‐ and low‐predation environments (Handelsman et al., 2013), but see Fu, Fu, Yuan, and Cao (2015) for conflicting evidence in a cyprinid. Although results are consistent with expectations under the “context‐dependent” hypothesis, we stress that this is merely a post hoc interpretation.…”

The behavioral response of prey fish to predators: the role of predator size

“…Predation is one of the central factors governing patterns in natural systems (Sih, Englund & Wooster, 1998), and the prey behavior is expected to change as a result of predation (Diehl & Eklöv, 1995; Ryan et al, 2012; Fu et al, 2015a; Fu et al, 2015b). For example, it has long been found that the chemical and visual cues of predators elicited alterations in space use and decreased foraging and exploration swimming activity in juveniles of fish species such as sticklebacks ( Gasterosteus aculeatus ), perch ( Perca fluviatilis ) and rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) (Milinski & Heller, 1978; Fraser & Gilliam, 1992; Diehl & Eklöv, 1995; Brown & Smith, 1998; Lehtiniemi, 2005; Kopack et al, 2015).…”