Prey catching in the archer fish: angles and probability of hitting an aerial target

Timmermans, P.J.A.

doi:10.1016/s0376-6357(01)00172-3

Cited by 28 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It differs remarkably from what sportsmen, such as baseball outfielders, do in comparable three-dimensional interceptive tasks in which the direction of target motion is not restricted within a narrow range (e.g. Chapman, 1968;McBeath et al, 1995;Regan, 1997;van der Camp et al, 1997;Shaffer and S. Wöhl and S. Schuster How to set take-off speed? What could be an advantage for the fish to adjust take-off speed to distance rather than simply heading off at maximum speed?…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Thereby the fish fire from positions not directly below their target but displaced laterally from it (e.g. Dill, 1977;Timmermans, 2001;Rossel et al, 2002;Schuster et al, 2004) so that their shot transfers horizontal momentum to their target and makes a small prey item fall on a ballistic path towards the water surface. It then takes only about 100·ms from the start of the prey's ballistic motion till the shooter as well as other school members can initiate a rapid turn and then head off straight in the direction of the later point of impact of the falling prey (Rossel et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hunting archer fish match their take-off speed to distance from the future point of catch

Wöhl

Schuster

2006

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Archer fish can shoot down insect prey with a sharp jet of water. Fish usually fire from positions that are not directly below their target so that a dislodged insect falls ballistically with a horizontal velocity component. Only 100 ms after the insect is on its path both the shooter and other school members can initiate a rapid turn and then head straight in the direction of the later point of impact of their falling prey. The quick turn and subsequent take-off are performed `open-loop', based on the initial values of the falling insect's motion. We report here that archer fish can not only take off in the direction of the later point of impact but also predict its distance. Distance information allows the fish to adjust their take-off speed so that they would arrive within a narrow time slot slightly (about 50 ms) after their prey's impact, despite large differences in the size of the aligning turn and in the distance to be covered. Selecting a constant speed program with matched speed and catching the insect on the move minimizes frictional losses. The initial speed of starting fish is slightly but systematically too slow and is increased later so that the fish arrive 20 ms earlier than expected and often make the catch on a higher than take-off speed. The variability of later speed changes suggests a systematic `error' in the take-off, as if the fish underestimated distance. However, this apparent deficiency seems well adapted to the fish catching their prey at a high speed: if later the fish had no possibility to correct an initial error then it is better to start slightly too slow in order to minimize the risk of overshooting the point of catch.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hunting archer fish match their take-off speed to distance from the future point of catch

Wöhl

Schuster

2006

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to the drag-reducing issues discussed above, this could be a behavioural modification intended to increase prey capture success. When objects are viewed from below the surface of the water at angles less than 90°, refraction results in a shift in the apparent position of the object such that it appears higher than it actually is (Dill 1977, Timmermans 2001. Some species of fish, such as the archer fish, Toxotes chatareus, are able to account and behaviourally correct for this deviation in prey position (Timmermans 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When objects are viewed from below the surface of the water at angles less than 90°, refraction results in a shift in the apparent position of the object such that it appears higher than it actually is (Dill 1977, Timmermans 2001. Some species of fish, such as the archer fish, Toxotes chatareus, are able to account and behaviourally correct for this deviation in prey position (Timmermans 2001). However, O. bicirrhosum may lack this ability, as supported by the fact that we observed failed prey capture attempts in the aerial but not the aquatic presentation treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aerial and aquatic feeding in the silver arawana, Osteoglossum bicirrhosum

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Similar projectile mechanisms have been investigated in other animals such as Archer fish (e.g. Timmermans, 2001;Schuster et al, 2006) and spitting spiders (Nentwig, 1985). These other animals using projectile mechanics increase their accuracy through visual tracking of their target; this allows the animal to effectively predict where the target will be in the near future and direct the projected matter to that spot (rather than where the moving target was at the time the bolus was discharged).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Target tracking during venom ‘spitting’ by cobras

Westhoff

Boetig

Bleckmann

et al. 2010

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Spitting cobras, which defend themselves by streaming venom towards the face and/or eyes of a predator, must be highly accurate because the venom they spit is only an effective deterrent if it lands on the predator's cornea. Several factors make this level of accuracy difficult to achieve; the target is moving, is frequently >1 m away from the snake and the venom stream is released in approximately 50 ms. In the present study we show that spitting cobras can accurately track the movements of a potentially threatening vertebrate, and by anticipating its subsequent (short-term) movements direct their venom to maximize the likelihood of striking the target's eye. Unlike other animals that project material, in spitting cobras the discharge orifice (the fang) is relatively fixed so directing the venom stream requires rapid movements of the entire head. The cobra's ability to track and anticipate the target's movement, and to perform rapid cephalic oscillations that coordinate with the target's movements suggest a level of neural processing that has not been attributed to snakes, or other reptiles, previously.

show abstract

Prey catching in the archer fish: angles and probability of hitting an aerial target

Cited by 28 publications

References 6 publications

Hunting archer fish match their take-off speed to distance from the future point of catch

Hunting archer fish match their take-off speed to distance from the future point of catch

Aerial and aquatic feeding in the silver arawana, Osteoglossum bicirrhosum

Target tracking during venom ‘spitting’ by cobras

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About