Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Alarm Cues (alarm + cue)
Selected AbstractsAvoidance of Chemical Alarm Cues Released from Autotomized Tails of Ravine Salamanders (Plethodon richmondi)ETHOLOGY, Issue 4 2001Jeffery A. Hucko The ability of animals to detect and avoid areas containing chemical alarm cues from conspecifics is well documented in aquatic species. The ability to detect chemical alarm cues in terrestrial organisms has not been tested until recently. In this study, we tested the ability of the ravine salamander (Plethodon richmondi) to detect and avoid areas containing chemicals released from the autotomized tails of conspecifics and sympatric zigzag salamanders (P. dorsalis). We also ascertained whether any avoidance response could be attributed to the size or sex of the animal. Our results suggest that ravine salamanders avoid substrates containing odors released from the autotomized tails of conspecifics, but not of heterospecific salamanders and that this response occurs independent of the size and/or sex of the animal. By avoiding areas where a conspecific has recently been injured, an organism could reduce its chances of encountering a predator and thus increase its chances of survival. [source] Learned Recognition of Intraspecific Predators in Larval Long-Toed Salamanders Ambystoma macrodactylumETHOLOGY, Issue 6 2001Erica L. Wildy The ability of prey to detect predators and respond accordingly is critical to their survival. The use of chemical cues by animals in predator detection has been widely documented. In many cases, predator recognition is facilitated by the release of alarm cues from conspecific victims. Alarm cues elicit anti-predator behavior in many species, which can reduce their risk of being attacked. It has been previously demonstrated that adult long-toed salamanders, Ambystoma macrodactylum, exhibit an alarm response to chemical cues from injured conspecifics. However, whether this response exists in the larval stage of this species and whether it is an innate or a learned condition is unknown. In the current study, we examined the alarm response of naïve (i.e. lab-reared) larval long-toed salamanders. We conducted a series of behavioral trials during which we quantified the level of activity and spatial avoidance of hungry and satiated focal larvae to water conditioned by an injured conspecific, a cannibal that had recently been fed a conspecific or a non-cannibal that was recently fed a diet of Tubifex worms. Focal larvae neither reduced their activity nor spatially avoided the area of the stimulus in either treatment when satiated, and exhibited increased activity towards the cannibal stimulus when hungry. We regard this latter behavior as a feeding response. Together these results suggest that an anti-predator response to injured conspecifics and to cannibalistic conspecifics is absent in naïve larvae. Previous studies have shown that experienced wild captured salamanders do show a response to cannibalistic conspecifics. Therefore, we conducted an additional experiment examining whether larvae can learn to exhibit anti-predator behavior in response to cues from cannibalized conspecifics. We exposed larvae to visual, chemical and tactile cues of stimulus animals that were actively foraging on conspecifics (experienced) or a diet of Tubifex (naïve treatment). In subsequent behavioral treatments, experienced larvae significantly reduced their activity compared to naive larvae in response to chemical cues of cannibals that had recently consumed conspecifics. We suggest that this behavior is a response to alarm cues released by consumed conspecifics that may have labeled the cannibal. Furthermore, over time, interactions with cannibals may cause potential prey larvae to learn to avoid cannibals regardless of their recent diet. [source] The Influence of Flowing Water on the Resource Pursuit-Risk Avoidance Tradeoff in the Crayfish Orconectes virilisETHOLOGY, Issue 4 2006Keith W. Pecor The influence of hydrodynamics on chemically mediated behavioral tradeoffs has received little attention. We tested the hypothesis that individuals of the crayfish Orconectes virilis would be more sensitive to chemical cues in flowing water than in still water. Orconectes virilis is a good subject for this test, because it is found in both still water (e.g. ponds), and flowing water (e.g. rivers). A factorial design was used, with two stimulus treatments and two habitat types. Crayfish were exposed to either food cue or food + alarm cue in either still water or flowing water in an artificial stream arena. Habitat use and activity were significantly influenced by stimulus treatment, with more time spent away from the stimulus source and less activity in the food + alarm treatment than in the food treatment. Neither habitat type nor the interaction of stimulus treatment and habitat type had a significant effect on the response variables. Given the natural history of O. virilis, we suggest that selection has favored the ability to equally utilize chemical cues in both still and flowing water. We acknowledge that different flow conditions may influence chemical ecology in this species and caution against the view that tests in flowing waters necessarily provide a more accurate approximation of natural responses. [source] Predator Inspection Behaviour in a Characin Fish: an Interaction between Chemical and Visual Information?ETHOLOGY, Issue 9 2003Grant E. Brown Recent evidence suggests that predator inspection behaviour by Ostariophysan prey fishes is regulated by both the chemical and visual cues of potential predators. In laboratory trials, we assessed the relative importance of chemical and visual information during inspection visits by varying both ambient light (visual cues) and predator odour (chemical cues) in a 2 × 2 experimental design. Shoals of glowlight tetras (Hemigrammus erythrozonus) were exposed to a live convict cichlid (Archocentrus nigrofasciatus) predator under low (3 lux) or high (50 lux) light levels and in the presence of the odour of a cichild fed tetras (with an alarm cue) or swordtails (Xiphophorus helleri, with an alarm cue not recognized by tetras). Tetras exhibited threat-sensitive inspection behaviour (increased latency to inspect, reduced frequency of inspection, smaller inspecting group sizes and increased minimum approach distance) towards a predator paired with a tetra-fed diet cue, regardless of light levels. Similar threat-sensitive inspection patterns were observed towards cichlids paired with a swordtail-fed diet cue only under high light conditions. Our data suggest that chemical cues in the form of prey alarm cues in the diet of the predator, are the primary source of information regarding local predation risk during inspection behaviour, and that visual cues are used when chemical information is unavailable or ambiguous. [source] Chemical Alarm Signals Enhance Survival of Brook Charr (Salvelinus fontinalis) During Encounters with Predatory Chain Pickerel (Esox niger)ETHOLOGY, Issue 11 2001Reehan S. Mirza A diversity of aquatic organisms release chemical alarm signals when attacked or captured by a predator. These alarm signals are thought to warn other conspecifics of danger and, consequently, may benefit receivers by increasing their survival. Here we experimentally investigated the differences in behaviour and survival of hatchery-reared juvenile brook charr Salvelinus fontinalis that had been exposed to either brook charr skin extract (experimental treatment) or a control of swordtail skin extract (control treatment). Charr exposed to conspecific skin extract exhibited a significant reduction in movement and/or altered their foraging behaviour in the laboratory when compared with charr exposed to swordtail skin extract. We also exposed charr to either water conditioned by a single brook charr disturbed by a predatory bird model or water conditioned by a single undisturbed brook charr. Charr exposed to disturbance signals reduced activity significantly more than charr exposed to chemical stimuli from undisturbed charr. These results demonstrate the existence of both damage-released alarm signals and disturbance signals in brook charr. Wild brook charr also responded to damage-released alarm cues under natural conditions. Charr avoided areas of a stream with minnow traps labelled with conspecific alarm cues vs. control cues. During staged encounters with chain pickerel Esox niger in the laboratory, predator-naive charr fry were better able to evade the predator if they were previously warned by an alarm signal, thus suggesting a survival benefit to receivers. Collectively, these results demonstrate that the presence of alarm signals in brook charr has important implications for understanding predator,prey interactions. [source] Learned Recognition of Intraspecific Predators in Larval Long-Toed Salamanders Ambystoma macrodactylumETHOLOGY, Issue 6 2001Erica L. Wildy The ability of prey to detect predators and respond accordingly is critical to their survival. The use of chemical cues by animals in predator detection has been widely documented. In many cases, predator recognition is facilitated by the release of alarm cues from conspecific victims. Alarm cues elicit anti-predator behavior in many species, which can reduce their risk of being attacked. It has been previously demonstrated that adult long-toed salamanders, Ambystoma macrodactylum, exhibit an alarm response to chemical cues from injured conspecifics. However, whether this response exists in the larval stage of this species and whether it is an innate or a learned condition is unknown. In the current study, we examined the alarm response of naïve (i.e. lab-reared) larval long-toed salamanders. We conducted a series of behavioral trials during which we quantified the level of activity and spatial avoidance of hungry and satiated focal larvae to water conditioned by an injured conspecific, a cannibal that had recently been fed a conspecific or a non-cannibal that was recently fed a diet of Tubifex worms. Focal larvae neither reduced their activity nor spatially avoided the area of the stimulus in either treatment when satiated, and exhibited increased activity towards the cannibal stimulus when hungry. We regard this latter behavior as a feeding response. Together these results suggest that an anti-predator response to injured conspecifics and to cannibalistic conspecifics is absent in naïve larvae. Previous studies have shown that experienced wild captured salamanders do show a response to cannibalistic conspecifics. Therefore, we conducted an additional experiment examining whether larvae can learn to exhibit anti-predator behavior in response to cues from cannibalized conspecifics. We exposed larvae to visual, chemical and tactile cues of stimulus animals that were actively foraging on conspecifics (experienced) or a diet of Tubifex (naïve treatment). In subsequent behavioral treatments, experienced larvae significantly reduced their activity compared to naive larvae in response to chemical cues of cannibals that had recently consumed conspecifics. We suggest that this behavior is a response to alarm cues released by consumed conspecifics that may have labeled the cannibal. Furthermore, over time, interactions with cannibals may cause potential prey larvae to learn to avoid cannibals regardless of their recent diet. [source] Avoidance of Chemical Alarm Cues Released from Autotomized Tails of Ravine Salamanders (Plethodon richmondi)ETHOLOGY, Issue 4 2001Jeffery A. Hucko The ability of animals to detect and avoid areas containing chemical alarm cues from conspecifics is well documented in aquatic species. The ability to detect chemical alarm cues in terrestrial organisms has not been tested until recently. In this study, we tested the ability of the ravine salamander (Plethodon richmondi) to detect and avoid areas containing chemicals released from the autotomized tails of conspecifics and sympatric zigzag salamanders (P. dorsalis). We also ascertained whether any avoidance response could be attributed to the size or sex of the animal. Our results suggest that ravine salamanders avoid substrates containing odors released from the autotomized tails of conspecifics, but not of heterospecific salamanders and that this response occurs independent of the size and/or sex of the animal. By avoiding areas where a conspecific has recently been injured, an organism could reduce its chances of encountering a predator and thus increase its chances of survival. [source] Interpreting the smells of predation: how alarm cues and kairomones induce different prey defencesFUNCTIONAL ECOLOGY, Issue 6 2009Nancy M. Schoeppner Summary 1.,For phenotypically plastic organisms to produce phenotypes that are well matched to their environment, they must acquire information about their environment. For inducible defences, cues from damaged prey and cues from predators both have the potential to provide important information, yet we know little about the relative importance of these separate sources of information for behavioural and morphological defences. We also do not know the point during a predation event at which kairomones are produced, i.e. whether they are produced constitutively, during prey attack or during prey digestion. 2.,We exposed leopard frog tadpoles (Rana pipiens) to nine predator cue treatments involving several combinations of cues from damaged conspecifics or heterospecifics, starved predators, predators only chewing prey, predators only digesting prey or predators chewing and digesting prey. 3.,We quantified two behavioural defences. Tadpole hiding behaviour was induced only by cues from crushed tadpoles. Reduced tadpole activity was induced only by cues from predators digesting tadpoles or predators chewing + digesting tadpoles. 4.,We also quantified tadpole mass and two size-adjusted morphological traits that are known to be phenotypically plastic. Mass was unaffected by the cue treatments. Relative body length was affected (i.e. there were differences among some treatments), but none of the treatments significantly differed from the no-predator control. Relative tail depth was affected by the treatments and deeper tails were induced only when tadpoles were exposed to cues from predators digesting tadpoles or cues from predators chewing + digesting tadpoles. 5.,These results demonstrate that some prey species can discriminate among a diverse set of potential cues from heterospecific prey, conspecific prey and predators. Moreover, the results illustrate that the cues responsible for the full suite of behavioural and morphological defences are not induced by tadpole crushing nor can they be induced by generalized digestive chemicals produced when predators digest their prey. Instead, both prey damage and predator digestion of conspecific tissues appear to be important for communicating predatory risk to phenotypically plastic anuran prey. Importantly, the production of chemical cues by predators may be unavoidable and prey have evolved the ability to eavesdrop on these signals. [source] | ||||||||||