Predator and prey detection in two species of water bear (Tardigrada)

Abstract Tardigrade behavioural studies have focused on responses to abiotic environmental conditions. Predator–prey interactions have received some attention, but not how predators and prey might detect one another. Here, we investigate whether a predatory tardigrade species is attracted to, and a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Zoological journal of the Linnean Society 2020-03, Vol.188 (3), p.860-864
Hauptverfasser: Meyer, Harry A, Larsen, Hannah E, Akobi, Nézira O, Broussard, Garret
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Tardigrade behavioural studies have focused on responses to abiotic environmental conditions. Predator–prey interactions have received some attention, but not how predators and prey might detect one another. Here, we investigate whether a predatory tardigrade species is attracted to, and a potential prey tardigrade avoids, areas previously occupied by the other. In our experiments, Milnesium lagniappe was the predator and Macrobiotus acadianus the prey. Petri dishes with non-nutrient agar were used as experimental arenas. In one treatment, we allowed Macrobiotus to roam over half of the agar for 20 h, while leaving the other half free of Macrobiotus. We then removed the prey and introduced the predator. In the control treatment, no prey were added. Results indicated that Milnesium individuals were significantly concentrated in the area previously occupied by Macrobiotus, whereas no such concentration was evident when Macrobiotus had not been present. A similar protocol was used to test whether Macrobiotus avoided areas previously occupied by the predator. As expected, Macrobiotus were significantly concentrated in the area never occupied by Milnesium, unlike the control treatment. These results suggest that both species can detect the other without physical contact and react accordingly. Given that the experiments were conducted in darkness, detection is probably olfactory.
ISSN:0024-4082
1096-3642
DOI:10.1093/zoolinnean/zlz141