Abstract
Shoaling is an evolved behavior in fishes that has several adaptive advantages, including allowing individuals to avoid predation through risk dilution. However, factors such as size disparity and the presence of heterospecifics may influence the behavior of individual fish within shoals following exposure to elevated predation risk. Using bluegill Lepomis macrochirus as a model species, we measured changes in area use, shoaling index, and movement of a focal individual in isolation, in single-species shoals with two conspecifics, or in mixed-species shoals with two congeneric pumpkinseed L. gibbosus. The experimental shoals were exposed to one of three chemical cues selected to present graded levels of risk: lakewater controls (lowest risk), Northern pike Esox lucius predator odor (kairomones; intermediate risk), or conspecific chemical alarm cues (highest risk). Within the individual bluegill, we found that the multivariate response of area use and post-stimulus activity (line crosses) of the focal fish was significantly influenced by pre-stimulus activity, but not by cue type or fish size. As univariate responses, post-stimulus activity varied positively with pre-stimulus activity. Post-stimulus activity was greater in single-species shoals compared to mixed-species shoals, and again varied positively with pre-stimulus activity. Contrary to predictions, bluegill did not demonstrate graded antipredator responses to the chemical cues. Our findings suggest that prey fish may alter their risk-aversive behaviors in response to chemical stimuli based on shoal composition and provide further insight into the role of intra-prey guild interactions in response to predators in co-occurring prey species.
Significance statement
When faced with predation, individuals in groups may experience lower levels of risk than solitary individuals. Using bluegill as a model organism, we examined how antipredator behaviors, in response to chemical cues indicating different levels of risk, varied between focal individuals as singletons and in single- and mixed-species shoals. Contrary to our prediction of graded stepwise responses indicative of differing levels of risk posed by the cues, we found that individuals with greater baseline activity levels demonstrated weaker antipredator responses independent of cue type, while fish in single-species shoals had higher post-stimulus activity levels than fish in mixed-species shoals. Our results suggest that studies examining changes in antipredator and shoaling behaviors will benefit from including ecologically relevant scenarios involving sympatric prey guild members.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allan JR, Pitcher TJ (1986) Species segregation during predator evasion in cyprinid fish shoals. Freshw Biol 16:653–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2427.1986.tb01007.x
Allen WE (1920) Behaviour of loon and sardines. Ecology 3:122–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/1929565
Angradi TR (1992) Effects of predation risk on foraging behavior of juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Can J Zool 70:355–360. https://doi.org/10.1139/z92-053
Biro PA, Stamps JA (2015) Using repeatability to study physiological and behavioural traits: ignore time-related change at your peril. Anim Behav 105:223–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.04.008
Brown GE (2003) Learning about danger: chemical alarm cues and local risk assessment in prey fishes. Fish Fish 4:227–234. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-2979.2003.00132.x
Brown GE, Chivers DP (2005) Learning as an adaptive response to predation. In: Barbosa P, Castellanos I (eds) Ecology of predator-prey interactions. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 34–54
Brown GE, Godin J-GJ (1999) Chemical alarm signals in wild Trinidadian guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Can J Zool 77:562–570. https://doi.org/10.1139/z99-035
Brown GE, Smith RJF (1998) Acquired predator recognition in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): conditioning hatchery-reared fish to recognize chemical cues of a predator. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 55:611–617. https://doi.org/10.1139/f97-261
Brown GE, Godin J-GJ, Pederson J (1999) Fin flicking behaviour: a visual antipredator alarm signal in characin fish (Hemmigrammus erythrozonus). Anim Behav 59:469–476. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.1999.1173
Brown GE, Macnaughton CJ, Elvidge CK, Ramnarine IW, Godin J-GJ (2009) Provenance and threat-sensitive predator avoidance patterns in wild-caught Trinidadian guppies. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:699–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-008-0703-4
Brown GE, Elvidge CK, Macnaughton CJ, Ramnarine IW, Godin J-GJ (2010) Cross-population responses to conspecific chemical alarm cues in wild Trinidadian guppies, Poecilia reticulata: evidence for local conservation of cue production. Can J Zool 88:139–147. https://doi.org/10.1139/Z09-127
Chivers DP, Brown GE, Smith RJF (1995) Familiarity and shoal cohesion in fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas): implications for antipredator behaviour. Can J Zool 73:955–960. https://doi.org/10.1139/z95-111
Chivers DP, Smith RJF (1998) Chemical alarm signaling in acquatic predator-prey systems: a review and prospectus. Ecoscience 5:338–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/11956860.1998.11682471
Croft DP, James R, Ward AJW, Botham MS, Mawdsley D, Krause J (2005) Assortative interactions and social networks in fish. Oecologia 143:211–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-004-1796-8
Dyer JRG, Croft DP, Morrell LJ, Krause J (2009) Shoal composition determines foraging success in the guppy. Behav Ecol 20:165–171. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arn129
Elvidge CK, Ramnarine IW, Godin J-GJ, Brown GE (2010) Size-mediated response to public cues of predation risk in a tropical stream fish. J Fish Biol 77:1632–1644. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2010.02798.x
Ferrari MCO, Wisenden BD, Chivers DP (2010) Chemical ecology of predator-prey interactions in aquatic ecosystems: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 88:698–724. https://doi.org/10.1139/Z10-029
Fitzgibbon CD (1990) Mixed-species grouping in Thomson’s and Grant’s gazelles: the antipredator benefits. Anim Behav 39:1116–1126. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80784-5
Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An R companion to applied regression, second edn. Sage, CA, Thousand Oaks http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/Companion. Accessed June 2018
Frommen JG, Herder F, Engqvist L, Mehlis M, Bakker TCM, Schwarzer J, Thünken T (2011) Costly plastic morphological responses to predator specific odour cues in three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Evol Ecol 25:641–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10682-010-9454-6
Gil MA, Emberts Z, Jones H, St Mary CM (2017) Social information on fear and food drives animal grouping and fitness. Am Nat 189:227–241. https://doi.org/10.1086/690055
Godin J-GJ, Classon LJ, Abrahams MV (1988) Group vigilance and shoal size in a small characin fish. Behaviour 104:29–40. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853988X00584
Goldenberg SU, Borcherding J, Heynen M (2014) Balancing the response to predation – the effects of shoal size, predation risk and habituation on behaviour of juvenile perch. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 68:989–998. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-014-1711-1
Golub JL, Vermette V, Brown GE (2005) Response to conspecific and heterospecific alarm cues by pumpkinseeds in simple and complex habitats: field verification of an ontogenetic shift. J Fish Biol 66:1073–1081. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-1112.2005.00658.x
Grobis MM, Pearish SP, Bell AM (2013) Avoidance or escape? Discriminating between two hypotheses for the function of schooling in threespine sticklebacks. Anim Behav 85:187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.10.025
Hager MC, Helfman GS (1991) Safety in numbers: shoal size choice by minnows under predatory threat. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 29:271–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00163984
Hain TJA, Neff BD (2009) Kinship affects innate responses to a predator in bluegill Lepomis macrochirus larvae. J Fish Biol 75:728–737. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02343.x
Hoare DJ, Krause J, Peuhkuri N, Godin J-GJ (2000) Body size and shoaling in fish. J Fish Biol 57:1351–1366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2000.tb02217.x
Inman AJ, Krebs J (1987) Predation and group living. Trends Ecol Evol 2:31–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(87)90093-0
Jachner A (1997) The response of bleak to predator odour of unfed and recently fed pike. J Fish Biol 50:878–886. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1997.tb01980.x
Korpi NL, Wisenden BD (2001) Learned recognition of novel predator odour by zebra danios, Danio rerio, following time-shifted presentation of alarm cue and predator odour. Environ Biol Fish 61:205–211. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011091426030
Larsson M (2009) Possible functions of the octavolateralis system in fish schooling. Fish Fish 10:344–353. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2009.00330.x
Larsson M (2012) Incidental sounds of locomotion in animal cognition. Anim Cogn 15:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-011-0433-2
Lautala T, Hirvonen H (2008) Antipredator behaviour of naïve Arctic charr young in the presence of predator odours and conspecific alarm cues. Ecol Freshw Fish 17:78–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0633.2007.00261.x
Lee-Jenkins SSY, Godin J-GJ (2010) Social familiarity and shoal formation in juvenile fishes. J Fish Biol 76:580–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2009.02512.x
Lima SL, Dill LM (1990) Behavioural decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619–640. https://doi.org/10.1139/z90-092
Mathis A, Smith R.J.F. (1993) Chemical labeling of northern pike (Esox lucius) by the alarm pheromone of fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas). Journal of Chemical Ecology 18:1967–1979 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00983800
Mazué GPF, Dechaume-Moncharmont FX, Godin J-GJ (2015) Boldness-exploration behavioral syndrome: interfamily variability and repeatability of personality traits in the young of the convict cichlid (Amatitlania siquia). Behav Ecol 26:900–908. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arv030
Mirabet V, Auger P, Lett C (2007) Spatial structures in simulations of animal grouping. Ecol Model 201:468–476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.10.018
Mittelbach GG, Ballew NG, Kjelvik MK (2014) Fish behavioral types and their ecological consequences. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 71:927–944. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfas-2013-0558
Nelson AB, Alemadi SD, Wisenden BD (2013) Learned recognition of novel; predator odour by convict cichlid embryos. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:1269–1273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-013-1554-1
Pitcher TJ (1983) Heuristic definitions of shoaling behaviour. Anim Behav 31:611–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-3472(83)80087-6
Piyapong C, Butlin RK, Faria JJ, Scruton KJ, Wang J, Krause J (2011) Kin assortment in juvenile shoals in wild guppy populations. Heredity 106:749–756. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2010.115
Pollock MS, Pollock RJ, Chivers DP (2006a) Effects of body size, body condition, and breeding state on responses to alarm cues by fathead minnows. Can J Zool 84:1351–1357. https://doi.org/10.1139/z06-122
Pollock MS, Pollock RJ, Chivers DP (2006b) Social context influence the antipredator behavior of fathead minnows to chemical alarm cues. Ethology 112:801–806. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2006.01222.x
R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing and graphics. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna https://www.r-project.org/. Accessed June 2018
Scheirer CJ, Ray WS, Hare N (1976) The analysis of ranked data derived from completely randomized factorial designs. Biometrics 32:429–434. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529511
Shier DM (2006) Effect of family support on the success of translocated black-tailed prairie dogs. Conserv Biol 20:1780–1790. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00512.x
Smith RJF (1992) Alarm signals in fishes. Rev Fish Biol Fish 2:33–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00042916
Smith RJF (1997) Avoiding and deterring predators. In: Godin J-GJ (ed) Behavioural ecology of teleost fishes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 163–190
Smith KL, Miner JG, Wiegmann DD, Newman SP (2009) Individual differences in exploratory and antipredator behaviour in juvenile smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu). Behaviour 146:283–294. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853909X410784
Stephenson JF (2016) Keeping eyes peeled: guppies exposed to chemical alarm cue are more responsive to ambiguous visual cues. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 70:575–584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-016-2076-4
Tang Z, Wu H, Huang Q, Kuang L, Fu S (2017) The shoaling behavior of two cyprinid species in conspecific and heterospecific groups. PeerJ 5:e3397. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3397
Tosh CR, Krause J, Ruxton GD (2009) Basic features, conjunctive searches, and the confusion effect in predator prey interactions. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 63:473–475. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-008-0667-4
Wagner CM, Kierczynski KE, Hume JB, Luhring TM (2016) Exposure to a putative alarm cue reduces downstream drift in a larval sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus in the laboratory. J Fish Biol 89:1897–1904. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.13095
Ward AJW, Axford S, Krause J (2002) Mixed-species shoaling in fish: the sensory mechanisms and costs of shoal choice. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:182–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-002-0505-z
Ward AJW, Sumpter DJT, Couzin ID, Hart PJB, Krause J (2008) Quorum decision-making facilitates information transfer in fish shoals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:6948–6953. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710344105
Warnes GR, Bolker B, Bonebakker L et al (2016) Various R programming tools for plotting data. R package version 3.0.1, https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/gplots/index.html. Accessed June 2018
Wilson ADM, Godin J-GJ (2009) Boldness and behavioral syndromes in the bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus. Behav Ecol 20:231–237. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arp018
Wisenden BD, Pollock MS, Tremaine RJ, Webb JM, Wismer ME, Chivers DP (2003) Synergistic interactions between chemical alarm cues and the presence of conspecific and heterospecific fish shoals. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:485–490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-003-0653-9
Wisenden BD, Karst J, Miller J, Miller S, Luselier L (2008) Anti-predator behaviour in response to conspecific chemical alarm cues in an esociform fish, Umbra limi (Kirtland 1840). Environ Biol Fish 82:85–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-007-9255-0
Xia J, Elvidge CK, Cooke SJ (2018) Niche separation, ontogeny, and heterospecific alarm responses in centrarchid sunfish. Behav Ecol 29:862–868. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/ary061
Ylönen H, Kortet R, Myntti J, Vainikka A (2007) Predator odor recognition and antipredatory response in fish: does the prey know the predator diel rhythm? Acta Oecol 31:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actao.2005.05.007
Zhao X, Ferrari MCO, Chivers DP (2006) Threat-sensitive learning of predator odours by prey fish. Behaviour 143:1103–1121. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853906778607408
Acknowledgments
We thank A. Chhor, M. Dickie, J. Goldman, S. Jones, N. Ott, B. Will, and E. Yolleck for their assistance in collecting test specimens for the experiments. L. Brown, M. Rice, and D. Pieroni assisted in specimen collection as well as performing the experiments. B. Will helped analyze trial videos. H. Rosner-Katz, J.C. Hendricks, and two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.
Funding
This project was conducted and funded as part of an undergraduate course offered under the Ontario Universities Program in Field Biology.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Author contributions: All the authors conceived and designed the experiments. JIL, SMD, and WMT performed the experiments. CKE analyzed the data. JIL and CKE wrote and revised the manuscript; SMD and WMT participated in the editing and revision process.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed and all work reported herein was conducted in accordance with the guidelines set by the Canadian Council on Animal Care and specified in Carleton University Teaching Protocol no. 105370. Approval from an ethics committee was not required for this study.
Additional information
Communicated by I. Hamilton
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 755 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lloren, J.I., Davidson, S.M., Twardek, W.M. et al. Baseline activity and shoal type determine antipredator behaviors in bluegill from a southern Ontario lake. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 73, 57 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-019-2669-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-019-2669-9