The effects of familiarity on competitive interactions between threespined sticklebacks

Utne‐Palm, Anne Christine; Hart, Paul J. B.

doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2000.910203.x

Cited by 117 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evidence that familiarity leads to reduced aggression has been previously documented for fishes including rainbow trout ( Johnsson 1997), three-spined sticklebacks (Utne-Palm & Hart 2000) and Atlantic salmon (O'Connor et al 2000). Furthermore, low levels of aggression are known to lead to improvements in vigilance, predator detection and survival ( Jakobsson 1987;Brick 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The putative benefits of preferential association with familiars include improved foraging opportunities (Metcalfe & Thomson 1995), reduced investment in epithelial alarm cells (Wisenden & Smith 1998) and reduced levels of resource competition (Jakobsson 1987;Johnsson 1997;Utne-Palm & Hart 2000). Indirect evidence for an anti-predator function of familiarity-biased association comes from a study of fathead minnows.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, because intense fighting may lead to an increased risk of being preyed upon ( Jakobsson 1987;Brick 1998), the decision to associate preferentially with familiar conspecifics may confer anti-predator advantages on individuals. Surprisingly, however, the advantages of choosing familiar partners remain unclear (Chivers et al 1995;Metcalfe & Thomson 1995;Hö jesjö et al 1998;Wisenden & Smith 1998;Utne-Palm & Hart 2000). A novel possibility is presented by considering the theory of limited attention.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Coping with divided attention: the advantage of familiarity

Griffiths

Brockmark

Höjesjö

et al. 2004

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability of an animal to perform a task successfully is limited by the amount of attention being simultaneously focused on other activities. One way in which individuals might reduce the cost of divided attention is by preferentially focusing on the most beneficial tasks. In territorial animals where aggression is lower among familiar individuals, the decision to associate preferentially with familiar conspecifics may therefore confer advantages by allowing attention to be switched from aggression to predator vigilance and feeding. Wild juvenile brown trout were used to test the prediction that familiar fishes respond more quickly than unfamiliar fishes to a simulated predator attack. Our results confirm this prediction by demonstrating that familiar trout respond 14% faster than unfamiliar individuals to a predator attack. The results also show that familiar fishes consume a greater number of food items, foraging at more than twice the rate of unfamiliar conspecifics. To the best of our knowledge, these results provide the first evidence that familiarity-biased association confers advantages through the immediate fitness benefits afforded by faster predator-evasion responses and the long-term benefits provided by increased feeding opportunities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coping with divided attention: the advantage of familiarity

Griffiths

Brockmark

Höjesjö

et al. 2004

Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Losers generally exhibit more pronounced behavioural and physiological (e.g. skin darkening) avoidance responses when faced with familiar opponents (Miklósi et al 1995(Miklósi et al , 1997Morris et al 1995;Johnsson 1997;O'Connor et al 2000;Utne-Palm & Hart 2000), suggesting that individual recognition amplifies the loser effect. Contests between familiar opponents seldom escalate (Keeley & Grant 1993;Earley et al 2003).…”

Section: Individual Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aggressive Behaviour in Fish: Integrating Information about Contest Costs

Hsu

Earley

Wolf

2011

Fish Cognition and Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the introductory chapter to the first edition of this book (Brown et al. 2006) noted, fish behaviour has long been viewed as stereotyped and not strongly influenced by context or experience. The recognition that experience and learning can influence fish behaviour coupled with observations of considerable variation in behaviour within and between individuals has led to an increasing awareness of the complexity of fish behaviour. Behavioural ecologists are interested in understanding the causes and effects of behavioural variation within individuals (e.g. over time), among individuals of a population and among populations. These causes and effects are related to the benefits and costs of the behaviour that influence the evolutionary success (fitness) of the individual.Over 40 years ago Tinbergen (1963) noted that behavioural variation could be examined from multiple perspectives. This variation could result, for example, from differences within and among individuals in genetics, age, size, sex, developmental history and morphological and physiological constraints. The variation could also be related to environmental situations encountered by an individual in the present or past and could result from the individual's past experiences. Behavioural variation presumably results from how each of these factors influences the benefits and costs of behaviour at a particular time and place. However, a more comprehensive understanding of behavioural variation will emerge only by integrating these different perspectives.Experiences could influence variables such as size, developmental history and physiological state that are predicted or observed to lead to behavioural differences. Experiences could also influence the individual's perception of its current environmental situation. For example, a fish that recently encountered a predator in a particular location may be less likely to engage in intense aggressive behaviour (Brick 1998(Brick , 1999 and spend more time scanning for potential predators than another fish at the same place that has never encountered a predator there.

show abstract

“…A corollary of this is the gradual decrease in familiarity preferences that occurs if familiar individuals are separated. For example, Utne- Palm & Hart's (2000) study of familiarity in three-spined stickleback revealed a gradual increase in familiarity over a 4-week period of association and a subsequent decrease in familiarity over a 4-week period of isolation. In a study of rainbow trout, Johnsson (1997) found that the separation of pairs of territorial combatants for a period of 3 days was sufficient for the familiarity-biased aggression levels to decay.…”

Section: P Promelasmentioning

confidence: 99%