Literature DB >> 18397251

The dynamics of predation risk assessment: responses of anuran larvae to chemical cues of predators.

Michael E Fraker1.   

Abstract

1. While the antipredator behaviour of prey has been well studied, little is known about the rules governing the predation risk assessment of prey. In this study, I measured the activity levels of predator-naive green frog (Rana clamitans) tadpoles during and after exposures to the chemical cue of predatory larval dragonflies (Anax spp.). I then used the lengths of the time lags from the end of the cue exposures until the tadpoles returned to a control level of activity as an index of the perceived risk of the tadpoles. 2. While tadpoles always responded upon exposure to the Anax chemical cue by strongly reducing their activity level, their perceived risk increased asymptotically over time during the initial period of the cue exposure. Tadpoles of all size classes perceived increasing risk in proportion to chemical cue concentration, but the length of time that tadpoles responded during cue exposure and the length of their post-exposure time lags decreased with increasing body mass. 3. The results suggest that the perceived risk of green frog tadpoles varies over time and does not correspond directly to their behavioural response (i.e. activity level). However, their perceived risk does appear to vary in accordance with the predation risk associated with the Anax chemical cue and the reliability of the information from the cue, and therefore may be predictable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18397251     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01386.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  10 in total

1.  Dissecting the smell of fear from conspecific and heterospecific prey: investigating the processes that induce anti-predator defenses.

Authors:  Heather M Shaffery; Rick A Relyea
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-09-12       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  You can't run but you can hide: refuge use in frog tadpoles elicits density-dependent predation by dragonfly larvae.

Authors:  Thomas John Hossie; Dennis L Murray
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  The relative importance of prey-borne and predator-borne chemical cues for inducible antipredator responses in tadpoles.

Authors:  Attila Hettyey; Zoltán Tóth; Kerstin E Thonhauser; Joachim G Frommen; Dustin J Penn; Josh Van Buskirk
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-07-11       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Sea Lamprey Alarm Cue Comprises Water- and Chloroform- Soluble Components.

Authors:  Emily L Mensch; Amila A Dissanayake; Muraleedharan G Nair; C Michael Wagner
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2022-10-13       Impact factor: 2.793

5.  Exploitation of chemical signaling by parasitoids: impact on host population dynamics.

Authors:  Marjolein E Lof; Maarten De Gee; Marcel Dicke; Gerrit Gort; Lia Hemerik
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 2.626

6.  The effect of prior experience on a prey's current perceived risk.

Authors:  Michael E Fraker
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Stress hormones mediate predator-induced phenotypic plasticity in amphibian tadpoles.

Authors:  Jessica Middlemis Maher; Earl E Werner; Robert J Denver
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Embryonic background risk promotes the survival of tadpoles facing surface predators.

Authors:  Adam L Crane; Douglas P Chivers; Maud C O Ferrari
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Habituation in anuran tadpoles and the role of risk uncertainty.

Authors:  Mariana Pueta; Dolores Ardanaz; Juan Cruz Tallone
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2021-07-24       Impact factor: 3.084

10.  Risk assessment based on indirect predation cues: revisiting fine-grained variation.

Authors:  Michael W McCoy; Stefan K Wheat; Karen M Warkentin; James R Vonesh
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2015-09-27       Impact factor: 2.912

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.