Differential habitat use and antipredator response of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus) to olfactory and visual cues from multiple predators
The indirect, behavioral effects of predation and predator-predator interactions can significantly alter the trophic ecology of many communities. In numerous instances, the strength of these effects may be determined by the ability of prey to identify predation risk through predator-specific cues an...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Oecologia 2010-04, Vol.162 (4), p.893-902 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 902 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 893 |
container_title | Oecologia |
container_volume | 162 |
creator | Martin, Charles W Fodrie, F. Joel Heck, Kenneth L. Jr Mattila, Johanna |
description | The indirect, behavioral effects of predation and predator-predator interactions can significantly alter the trophic ecology of many communities. In numerous instances, the strength of these effects may be determined by the ability of prey to identify predation risk through predator-specific cues and respond accordingly to avoid capture. We exposed juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus), a common forage fish in many brackish and freshwater environments, to vision and/or olfactory cues from two predators with different hunting methods: northern pike (Esox lucius, an ambush predator) and European perch (Perca fluviatilis, a roving predator). Our results demonstrated that responses of roach to perceived risk (as evidenced by their selection of structured or open-water habitats) were highly dependent on cue type and predator identity. For instance, roach responded to olfactory cues of pike by entering open-water habitat, but entered structured habitat when presented with a vision cue of this predator. Opposite responses were elicited from roach for both olfactory and visual cues of perch. Interestingly, roach defaulted to selection of structured habitat when presented with vision + olfaction cues of either predator. Moreover, when presented individual cues of both predators together, roach responded by choosing open-water habitat. Upon being presented with vision + olfaction cues of both predators, however, roach strongly favored structured habitat. Differences in habitat selection of roach were likely in response to the alternative foraging strategies of the two predators, and suggest that prey species may not always use structured habitats as protection. This appears particularly true when a threat is perceived, but cannot immediately be located. These results provide insight to the complex and variable nature by which prey respond to various cues and predators, and offer a mechanistic guide for how behaviorally mediated and predator-predator interactions act as structuring processes in aquatic systems. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00442-010-1564-x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_902334291</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A355467308</galeid><jstor_id>40606620</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A355467308</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c579t-43e3efc09e1fca48035ee87bdd66e0f81f5b15bc5294b34a41abeae09e54b9573</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkttu1DAQhiMEoqXwAFwAEQhBL1LGpyS-rMqpUiWkll5bjne8zSobL3ZSbZ-Bl2aWbAuLEMiyLGu-_x8f_ix7yuCIAVTvEoCUvAAGBVOlLNb3sn0mBS-YFvp-tg_AdVErqfeyRyktAJhkSj3M9jgwXomy2s--v2-9x4j90Nouv7JNO9ghHxPmtp_RHNpVxJkdQswjplXoqRJ8vhivsW87zGOw7ip_ez4ObTemPE7rYT6EPHTeOhLe_LS6btNIHdyIKfcxLPPl2JE5Wdw2SI-zB952CZ9s14Ps8uOHryefi7Mvn05Pjs8Kpyo9FFKgQO9AI_POyhqEQqyrZjYrSwRfM68aphqnuJaNkFYy26BF4pVstKrEQfZm8l3F8I3OM5hlmxx2ne0xjMlo4EJIrtl_yYo44PQVRL78g1yEMfZ0DcO05iUvQRP0aoLmtkPT9j4M0bqNpTkWSsmyElATdfQXisYMl60LPXp6-F3B4Y6AmAHXw9yOKZnTi_Ndlk2siyGliN6sYru08cYwMJtQmSlUBjZ7CpVZk-b59m5js8TZneI2RQS83gI2Odv5aHvXpl8cVwoqJYjjE5eo1M8x_vZI_-j-bBItEoXkzlRCCWXJgeovprq3wdh5pMaXF3Q0AaxmFdmJHzCz9yE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>199262609</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Differential habitat use and antipredator response of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus) to olfactory and visual cues from multiple predators</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Martin, Charles W ; Fodrie, F. Joel ; Heck, Kenneth L. Jr ; Mattila, Johanna</creator><creatorcontrib>Martin, Charles W ; Fodrie, F. Joel ; Heck, Kenneth L. Jr ; Mattila, Johanna</creatorcontrib><description>The indirect, behavioral effects of predation and predator-predator interactions can significantly alter the trophic ecology of many communities. In numerous instances, the strength of these effects may be determined by the ability of prey to identify predation risk through predator-specific cues and respond accordingly to avoid capture. We exposed juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus), a common forage fish in many brackish and freshwater environments, to vision and/or olfactory cues from two predators with different hunting methods: northern pike (Esox lucius, an ambush predator) and European perch (Perca fluviatilis, a roving predator). Our results demonstrated that responses of roach to perceived risk (as evidenced by their selection of structured or open-water habitats) were highly dependent on cue type and predator identity. For instance, roach responded to olfactory cues of pike by entering open-water habitat, but entered structured habitat when presented with a vision cue of this predator. Opposite responses were elicited from roach for both olfactory and visual cues of perch. Interestingly, roach defaulted to selection of structured habitat when presented with vision + olfaction cues of either predator. Moreover, when presented individual cues of both predators together, roach responded by choosing open-water habitat. Upon being presented with vision + olfaction cues of both predators, however, roach strongly favored structured habitat. Differences in habitat selection of roach were likely in response to the alternative foraging strategies of the two predators, and suggest that prey species may not always use structured habitats as protection. This appears particularly true when a threat is perceived, but cannot immediately be located. These results provide insight to the complex and variable nature by which prey respond to various cues and predators, and offer a mechanistic guide for how behaviorally mediated and predator-predator interactions act as structuring processes in aquatic systems.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-8549</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-1939</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00442-010-1564-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20127367</identifier><identifier>CODEN: OECOBX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Berlin/Heidelberg : Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Animal and plant ecology ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Animals ; Aquatic environment ; Aquatic habitats ; BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY - ORIGINAL PAPER ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Cues ; Cyprinidae - physiology ; Ecology ; Ecosystem ; Esox lucius ; Experimentation ; Finland ; Fish ; Food Chain ; Foraging ; Fresh Water ; Fresh water ecosystems ; Freshwater environments ; Freshwater fish ; Freshwater fishes ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Habitat preferences ; Habitat selection ; Habitat utilization ; Habitats ; Hydrology/Water Resources ; Life Sciences ; Odorants - analysis ; Olfaction ; Olfactory perception ; Perca fluviatilis ; Photic Stimulation ; Plant Sciences ; Predators ; Predatory Behavior - physiology ; Prey ; Rutilus rutilus ; Synecology ; Time Factors ; Wildlife habitats</subject><ispartof>Oecologia, 2010-04, Vol.162 (4), p.893-902</ispartof><rights>2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag 2010</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2010 Springer</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c579t-43e3efc09e1fca48035ee87bdd66e0f81f5b15bc5294b34a41abeae09e54b9573</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c579t-43e3efc09e1fca48035ee87bdd66e0f81f5b15bc5294b34a41abeae09e54b9573</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40606620$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40606620$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,805,27933,27934,41497,42566,51328,58026,58259</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=22550753$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20127367$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Martin, Charles W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fodrie, F. Joel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heck, Kenneth L. Jr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mattila, Johanna</creatorcontrib><title>Differential habitat use and antipredator response of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus) to olfactory and visual cues from multiple predators</title><title>Oecologia</title><addtitle>Oecologia</addtitle><addtitle>Oecologia</addtitle><description>The indirect, behavioral effects of predation and predator-predator interactions can significantly alter the trophic ecology of many communities. In numerous instances, the strength of these effects may be determined by the ability of prey to identify predation risk through predator-specific cues and respond accordingly to avoid capture. We exposed juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus), a common forage fish in many brackish and freshwater environments, to vision and/or olfactory cues from two predators with different hunting methods: northern pike (Esox lucius, an ambush predator) and European perch (Perca fluviatilis, a roving predator). Our results demonstrated that responses of roach to perceived risk (as evidenced by their selection of structured or open-water habitats) were highly dependent on cue type and predator identity. For instance, roach responded to olfactory cues of pike by entering open-water habitat, but entered structured habitat when presented with a vision cue of this predator. Opposite responses were elicited from roach for both olfactory and visual cues of perch. Interestingly, roach defaulted to selection of structured habitat when presented with vision + olfaction cues of either predator. Moreover, when presented individual cues of both predators together, roach responded by choosing open-water habitat. Upon being presented with vision + olfaction cues of both predators, however, roach strongly favored structured habitat. Differences in habitat selection of roach were likely in response to the alternative foraging strategies of the two predators, and suggest that prey species may not always use structured habitats as protection. This appears particularly true when a threat is perceived, but cannot immediately be located. These results provide insight to the complex and variable nature by which prey respond to various cues and predators, and offer a mechanistic guide for how behaviorally mediated and predator-predator interactions act as structuring processes in aquatic systems.</description><subject>Animal and plant ecology</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Aquatic environment</subject><subject>Aquatic habitats</subject><subject>BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY - ORIGINAL PAPER</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Cyprinidae - physiology</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Ecosystem</subject><subject>Esox lucius</subject><subject>Experimentation</subject><subject>Finland</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Food Chain</subject><subject>Foraging</subject><subject>Fresh Water</subject><subject>Fresh water ecosystems</subject><subject>Freshwater environments</subject><subject>Freshwater fish</subject><subject>Freshwater fishes</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Habitat preferences</subject><subject>Habitat selection</subject><subject>Habitat utilization</subject><subject>Habitats</subject><subject>Hydrology/Water Resources</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Odorants - analysis</subject><subject>Olfaction</subject><subject>Olfactory perception</subject><subject>Perca fluviatilis</subject><subject>Photic Stimulation</subject><subject>Plant Sciences</subject><subject>Predators</subject><subject>Predatory Behavior - physiology</subject><subject>Prey</subject><subject>Rutilus rutilus</subject><subject>Synecology</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Wildlife habitats</subject><issn>0029-8549</issn><issn>1432-1939</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkttu1DAQhiMEoqXwAFwAEQhBL1LGpyS-rMqpUiWkll5bjne8zSobL3ZSbZ-Bl2aWbAuLEMiyLGu-_x8f_ix7yuCIAVTvEoCUvAAGBVOlLNb3sn0mBS-YFvp-tg_AdVErqfeyRyktAJhkSj3M9jgwXomy2s--v2-9x4j90Nouv7JNO9ghHxPmtp_RHNpVxJkdQswjplXoqRJ8vhivsW87zGOw7ip_ez4ObTemPE7rYT6EPHTeOhLe_LS6btNIHdyIKfcxLPPl2JE5Wdw2SI-zB952CZ9s14Ps8uOHryefi7Mvn05Pjs8Kpyo9FFKgQO9AI_POyhqEQqyrZjYrSwRfM68aphqnuJaNkFYy26BF4pVstKrEQfZm8l3F8I3OM5hlmxx2ne0xjMlo4EJIrtl_yYo44PQVRL78g1yEMfZ0DcO05iUvQRP0aoLmtkPT9j4M0bqNpTkWSsmyElATdfQXisYMl60LPXp6-F3B4Y6AmAHXw9yOKZnTi_Ndlk2siyGliN6sYru08cYwMJtQmSlUBjZ7CpVZk-b59m5js8TZneI2RQS83gI2Odv5aHvXpl8cVwoqJYjjE5eo1M8x_vZI_-j-bBItEoXkzlRCCWXJgeovprq3wdh5pMaXF3Q0AaxmFdmJHzCz9yE</recordid><startdate>20100401</startdate><enddate>20100401</enddate><creator>Martin, Charles W</creator><creator>Fodrie, F. Joel</creator><creator>Heck, Kenneth L. Jr</creator><creator>Mattila, Johanna</creator><general>Berlin/Heidelberg : Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100401</creationdate><title>Differential habitat use and antipredator response of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus) to olfactory and visual cues from multiple predators</title><author>Martin, Charles W ; Fodrie, F. Joel ; Heck, Kenneth L. Jr ; Mattila, Johanna</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c579t-43e3efc09e1fca48035ee87bdd66e0f81f5b15bc5294b34a41abeae09e54b9573</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Animal and plant ecology</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Aquatic environment</topic><topic>Aquatic habitats</topic><topic>BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY - ORIGINAL PAPER</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Cyprinidae - physiology</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Ecosystem</topic><topic>Esox lucius</topic><topic>Experimentation</topic><topic>Finland</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Food Chain</topic><topic>Foraging</topic><topic>Fresh Water</topic><topic>Fresh water ecosystems</topic><topic>Freshwater environments</topic><topic>Freshwater fish</topic><topic>Freshwater fishes</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Habitat preferences</topic><topic>Habitat selection</topic><topic>Habitat utilization</topic><topic>Habitats</topic><topic>Hydrology/Water Resources</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Odorants - analysis</topic><topic>Olfaction</topic><topic>Olfactory perception</topic><topic>Perca fluviatilis</topic><topic>Photic Stimulation</topic><topic>Plant Sciences</topic><topic>Predators</topic><topic>Predatory Behavior - physiology</topic><topic>Prey</topic><topic>Rutilus rutilus</topic><topic>Synecology</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Wildlife habitats</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Martin, Charles W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fodrie, F. Joel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heck, Kenneth L. Jr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mattila, Johanna</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Oecologia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Martin, Charles W</au><au>Fodrie, F. Joel</au><au>Heck, Kenneth L. Jr</au><au>Mattila, Johanna</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Differential habitat use and antipredator response of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus) to olfactory and visual cues from multiple predators</atitle><jtitle>Oecologia</jtitle><stitle>Oecologia</stitle><addtitle>Oecologia</addtitle><date>2010-04-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>162</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>893</spage><epage>902</epage><pages>893-902</pages><issn>0029-8549</issn><eissn>1432-1939</eissn><coden>OECOBX</coden><abstract>The indirect, behavioral effects of predation and predator-predator interactions can significantly alter the trophic ecology of many communities. In numerous instances, the strength of these effects may be determined by the ability of prey to identify predation risk through predator-specific cues and respond accordingly to avoid capture. We exposed juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus), a common forage fish in many brackish and freshwater environments, to vision and/or olfactory cues from two predators with different hunting methods: northern pike (Esox lucius, an ambush predator) and European perch (Perca fluviatilis, a roving predator). Our results demonstrated that responses of roach to perceived risk (as evidenced by their selection of structured or open-water habitats) were highly dependent on cue type and predator identity. For instance, roach responded to olfactory cues of pike by entering open-water habitat, but entered structured habitat when presented with a vision cue of this predator. Opposite responses were elicited from roach for both olfactory and visual cues of perch. Interestingly, roach defaulted to selection of structured habitat when presented with vision + olfaction cues of either predator. Moreover, when presented individual cues of both predators together, roach responded by choosing open-water habitat. Upon being presented with vision + olfaction cues of both predators, however, roach strongly favored structured habitat. Differences in habitat selection of roach were likely in response to the alternative foraging strategies of the two predators, and suggest that prey species may not always use structured habitats as protection. This appears particularly true when a threat is perceived, but cannot immediately be located. These results provide insight to the complex and variable nature by which prey respond to various cues and predators, and offer a mechanistic guide for how behaviorally mediated and predator-predator interactions act as structuring processes in aquatic systems.</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Berlin/Heidelberg : Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>20127367</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00442-010-1564-x</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0029-8549 |
ispartof | Oecologia, 2010-04, Vol.162 (4), p.893-902 |
issn | 0029-8549 1432-1939 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_902334291 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
subjects | Animal and plant ecology Animal, plant and microbial ecology Animals Aquatic environment Aquatic habitats BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY - ORIGINAL PAPER Biological and medical sciences Biomedical and Life Sciences Cues Cyprinidae - physiology Ecology Ecosystem Esox lucius Experimentation Finland Fish Food Chain Foraging Fresh Water Fresh water ecosystems Freshwater environments Freshwater fish Freshwater fishes Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology General aspects Habitat preferences Habitat selection Habitat utilization Habitats Hydrology/Water Resources Life Sciences Odorants - analysis Olfaction Olfactory perception Perca fluviatilis Photic Stimulation Plant Sciences Predators Predatory Behavior - physiology Prey Rutilus rutilus Synecology Time Factors Wildlife habitats |
title | Differential habitat use and antipredator response of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus) to olfactory and visual cues from multiple predators |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-02T23%3A05%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Differential%20habitat%20use%20and%20antipredator%20response%20of%20juvenile%20roach%20(Rutilus%20rutilus)%20to%20olfactory%20and%20visual%20cues%20from%20multiple%20predators&rft.jtitle=Oecologia&rft.au=Martin,%20Charles%20W&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=162&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=893&rft.epage=902&rft.pages=893-902&rft.issn=0029-8549&rft.eissn=1432-1939&rft.coden=OECOBX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00442-010-1564-x&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA355467308%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=199262609&rft_id=info:pmid/20127367&rft_galeid=A355467308&rft_jstor_id=40606620&rfr_iscdi=true |