The sensory basis of fish schools: Relative roles of lateral line and vision

In many species, group cohesion may be the result of a compromise between opposing forces (e.g. predator avoidance and competition for food). However, little empirical data exists on the dynamics of group cohesion. We present moment-to-moment positional data on zebrafish shoals and analyze temporal changes in inter-individual distances. We demonstrate that the distance between shoal members does not settle at any given value, as has previously been assumed, but oscillates with a period between 5 and 15 s. KeywordsShoaling; Schooling; Zebrafish; Oscillations Many species, from ants to humans, live in groups and interact with each other [13,14]. Members of groups often face opposing forces: some factors may favor tighter groups and others favor more dispersed groups. For example, numerous group-forming species must balance the requirements of efficient foraging with protection from predation: foraging efficiency increases with decreasing group density [10,12] but protection from predation decreases [4,6]. Many researchers have argued that as a result of such opposing forces, group density should settle at a species-specific optimal value. Whilst several models have been developed to take such opposing forces into account and to explain how an optimal group density or size are achieved (e.g. Refs. [16,7]), the temporal dynamics of group density changes, if they occur at all, have been ignored. Most previous experimental studies of group behavior have averaged the distances between group members over several observation periods, or considered only the nearest neighbors of each individual (e.g. Ref. [8]). Thus, the data to validate or disprove the existence of an optimal group density or its temporal stability do not exist.Here, using custom software [5], we examined high temporal resolution data on the positions of free-swimming zebrafish (Daniorerio). We focused on the distances between individuals within a group (AvD) and examined how they change over time. Our initial examination of the data suggested that there may be regular oscillations in shoal density, as measured by the average distance between fish, and we investigated whether these oscillations were robust and whether they had a characteristic frequency. We show that zebrafish do not settle on an average distance from conspecifics in the shoal, but that shoal density fluctuates with a characteristic frequency. To examine shoaling preferences, 3 groups of 16 zebrafish each were placed in a 91-cm diameter circular tank and filmed from above for 30min per session for 6 sessions. Using custom software described in detail elsewhere [5], we extracted from the videos of the experiments the average distance in cm between any two fish (AvD). AvD is the average of the inter-individual distances (IIDs), which are the average distance of a given fish from all the other fish in the enclosure.Five 1-min long sections of the sessions (at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 min from the start of the session) were coded at 1 s intervals (one frame per second). Thus, each datase...

show abstract

“…Refs. [8,9]). Further study of these possibilities may help elucidate the underlying mechanisms of shoaling.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Oscillations in shoal cohesion in zebrafish (Danio rerio)

Miller

Gerlai

2008

Behavioural Brain Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This rule is given the highest priority and corresponds to a frequently observed behavior of animals in nature [18]. If individuals are not performing, an avoidance maneuver they tend to be attracted towards other individuals (to avoid being isolated) and to align themselves with neighbors [19], [20]. Couzin et al [17] identified four collective dynamical behaviors as illustrated in Figure 4.7:…”

Section: Swarm Intelligence -An Overview and Relevance To Bioinformaticsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…• Dynamic parallel group: the individuals are polarized and move as a coherent group, but individuals can move throughout the group and density and group form can fluctuate [19], [21].…”

Section: Swarm Intelligence -An Overview and Relevance To Bioinformaticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Swarm Intelligence Algorithms in Bioinformatics

Das

Abraham

Konar

2008

Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Studies designed to identify the relative roles of vision and the lateral line system have often relied on experimental manipulation of the fish, e.g. temporary blinding (Pitcher et al, 1976;Partridge and Pitcher, 1980), and chemical (e.g. Karlsen and Sand, 1987;Kaus, 1987;Song et al, 1995) or physical (e.g.…”

Section: What Is the Optimal Design For Fish Passage Structures?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimentation at the interface of fluvial geomorphology, stream ecology and hydraulic engineering and the development of an effective, interdisciplinary river science

Rice

Lancaster

Kemp

2009

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One "2020 vision" for fluvial geomorphology is that it sits alongside stream ecology and hydraulic engineering as a key element of an integrated, interdisciplinary river science. A challenge to this vision is that scientists from these three communities may approach problems from different perspectives with different questions and have different methodological outlooks. Refining interdisciplinary methodology is important in this context, but raises a number of issues for geomorphologists, ecologists and engineers alike. In particular, we believe that it is important that there is greater dialogue about the nature of mutually-valued questions and the adoption of mutually-acceptable methods. As a contribution to this dialogue we examine the benefits and challenges of using physical experimentation in flume laboratories to ask interdisciplinary questions. Working in this arena presents the same challenges that experimental geomorphologists and engineers are familiar with (scaling up results, technical difficulties, realism) and some new ones including recognising the importance of biological processes, identifying hydraulically meaningful biological groups, accommodating the singular behaviour of individuals, understanding biological as well as physical stimuli, and the husbandry and welfare of live organisms. These issues are illustrated using two examples from flume experiments designed (1) to understand how the movement behaviours of aquatic insects through the near-bed flow field of gravelly river beds may allow them to survive flood events, and (2) how an understanding of the way in which fish behaviours and swimming capability are affected by flow conditions around artificial structures can lead to the design of effective fish passages. In each case, an interdisciplinary approach has been of substantial mutual benefit and led to greater insights than discipline-specific work would have produced. Looking forward to 2020, several key challenges for experimentalists working on the interface of fluvial geomorphology, stream ecology and hydraulic engineering are identified.3

show abstract

The sensory basis of fish schools: Relative roles of lateral line and vision

Cited by 490 publications

References 22 publications

Oscillations in shoal cohesion in zebrafish (Danio rerio)

Oscillations in shoal cohesion in zebrafish (Danio rerio)

Swarm Intelligence Algorithms in Bioinformatics

Experimentation at the interface of fluvial geomorphology, stream ecology and hydraulic engineering and the development of an effective, interdisciplinary river science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About