Sensory biology: linking the internal and external ecologies of marine organisms

Abstract

Contributions to this Theme Section (TS) articulate an increasingly powerful synthesis in ecology: understanding animal perceptual abilities lends insight into ecological interactions that, in turn, determine fundamental properties of populations of organisms and communities. This synthesis, often referred to as sensory ecology (e.g. Dusenbery 1992), has its antecedents in diverse fields ranging from sensory physiology, behavior and behavioral ecology, to classical population ecology (e.g. Lythgoe 1979, Dusenbery 1992, Endler 2000. However, it is unique in the explicit recognition that the capacity of organisms to acquire information from the environment is an essential determinant of ecological function. Thus, sensory ecology acts as the disciplinary interface between the processes occurring within organisms and those occurring between organisms and their environment.The sub-discipline of sensory ecology is a relatively new endeavour. Although sensory physiology, behavior and ecology are all well established areas that have made substantial contributions to our understanding of the natural world, there is a distinct lack of studies that link the inner and outer ecologies of animals. The explanation for this may lie in a historical tendency to pursue specialized knowledge within a given level of inquiry at the expense of synthesis across levels (see Saarinen 1980). Whereas sensory physiologists largely address the mechanisms operating within organisms Meganyctiphanes norvegica. Knowing which sensory modes the Northern krill uses to locate prey is central to evaluations of its feeding ecology. This Theme Section presents case studies that demonstrate how sensory biology is required to mechanistically link the organism's internal and external ecologies and, thereby, to make well-founded and accurate predictions about key processes in marine ecology. Photo copyright Uwe Kils, Rutgers University. Used by permission Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisherMar Ecol Prog Ser 287: 2005 (or their cells), ecologists have often treated animals as black boxes whose inner workings are mysterious, irrelevant or assumed. Of course, it is not always necessary to understand how animals do things in order to advance the science of ecology. The importance of predation as a force structuring natural communities is plain even in the absence of detailed knowledge of how animals find their prey. Equally clear, however, is that information on perceptual mechanisms is sometimes indispensable for arriving at valid conclusions. For example, optimal foraging theory has been a useful heuristic tool, but has been less successful in predicting ecological outcomes, in part, because assumptions of perceptual capabilities (e.g. instantaneous recognition of prey types and their energetic value) are often unrealistic (Krebs & Davies 1991).As documented in the contributions to this TS, a firm appreciation of sensory biology can provide insights into animal distributions, relationships among competitors, pat...

Laboratory-Based Observations of Behaviour in Northern Krill (Meganyctiphanes norvegica Sars)

“…They also noted that the perceptual distance of the krill was higher in light than dark conditions. This, together with other work on feeding from aquarium-based studies, reinforces the concept of the importance of multi-sensory approaches to understanding pelagic plankton responses to stimuli (Weissburg & Browman, 2005).…”

“…A difference in the relative proportion of the two species consumed under light and dark conditions was notedunder illuminated conditions more Calanus were consumed than in the dark, despite there being little apparent difference in the swimming speeds of the prey under either condition. Although Weissburg & Browman (2005) suggested that it would be inaccurate to characterise M. norvegica as a visual predator on the basis of this work, they later acknowledged that light intensity does seem to affect predation efficiency of this species (Abrahamsen et al, 2010). Price (1989) was able to observe feeding behaviour of krill (Thysanoessa rachii) in a mesocosm and reported changes in behaviour when the krill encountered food.…”

An approach to unraveling the coexistence of snappers (Lutjanidae) using otolith morphology

“…Sensory ecology acts as the interface between processes occurring within organisms and those occurring between organisms and their environment (Weissburg 2005). Fishes have a variety of sensory receptors that enable them to glean information from their surroundings (Atema et al 1988).…”

Testing otolith morphology for measuring marine fish biodiversity

“…Techniques for measuring diversity have varied over time, and include taxonomic, phylogenetic, morphological and functional indices (Clarke and Warwick 2001;McClain et al 2004;Petchey and Gaston 2006;Vellend et al 2011;Farré et al 2013). Morpho-functional diversity is recognised as a key element representing the roles that organisms play within ecosystems because interspecific competition among ecologically equivalent species facilitates different life strategies (Karr and James 1975;Motta et al 1995;Weissburg 2005;Villéger et al 2010). In recent and fossil fish, most studies have focussed primarily on morpho-functional traits related to feeding and locomotor apparatus, because these features are considered to be indicators of resource partitioning and thus linked to species coexistence (e.g.…”