Literature DB >> 18840664

Integrating the determinants of suction feeding performance in centrarchid fishes.

Roi Holzman1, Steven W Day, Rita S Mehta, Peter C Wainwright.   

Abstract

When suction-feeding vertebrates expand their buccal cavity to draw water into their mouth, they also exert a hydrodynamic force on their prey. This force is key to strike success, directly countering forces exerted by escaping or clinging prey. While the ability to produce high flow accelerations in front of the mouth is central to the predator's ability to exert high forces on the prey, several mechanisms can contribute to the disparity between the potential and realized performance through their effect on flow and acceleration as experienced by the prey. In the present study, we test how interspecific variation in gape size, mouth displacement speed and the fish's ability to locate prey at the optimal position affect variation in the force exerted on attached prey. We directly measured these forces by allowing bluegill sunfish and largemouth bass to strike at ghost shrimp tethered to a load cell that recorded force at 5000 Hz, while synchronously recording strikes with a 500 Hz video. Strike kinematics of largemouth bass were slower than that of bluegill, as were estimated flow speeds and the force exerted on the prey. This difference in force persisted after taking into account the faster suction flows and accelerations of bluegill, and was only accounted for by considering interspecific differences in gape size, mouth displacement speed and fish's ability to locate the prey at the optimal position. The contribution to interspecific differences in the force exerted on the prey was estimated to be 42% for flow speed, 25% for strike efficiency, 3% for gape size and 30% for mouth displacement speed. Hence, kinematic diversity results in substantial differences in suction performance, beyond those expected based on the capacity to generate a high flow velocity. This functional complexity, in the form of biomechanically independent mechanisms that are recruited for one function, can potentially mitigate performance trade-offs in suction-feeding fishes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18840664     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.020909

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  10 in total

1.  The benefits of planar circular mouths on suction feeding performance.

Authors:  Tyler Skorczewski; Angela Cheer; Peter C Wainwright
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2012-02-07       Impact factor: 4.118

2.  Bentho-pelagic divergence of cichlid feeding architecture was prodigious and consistent during multiple adaptive radiations within African rift-lakes.

Authors:  W James Cooper; Kevin Parsons; Alyssa McIntyre; Brittany Kern; Alana McGee-Moore; R Craig Albertson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-03-08       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Swimming muscles power suction feeding in largemouth bass.

Authors:  Ariel L Camp; Thomas J Roberts; Elizabeth L Brainerd
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-06-22       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Hydrodynamic Simulations of the Performance Landscape for Suction-Feeding Fishes Reveal Multiple Peaks for Different Prey Types.

Authors:  Karin H Olsson; Christopher H Martin; Roi Holzman
Journal:  Integr Comp Biol       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 3.326

5.  Modelled three-dimensional suction accuracy predicts prey capture success in three species of centrarchid fishes.

Authors:  Emily A Kane; Timothy E Higham
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 4.118

6.  Aquatic feeding in pipid frogs: the use of suction for prey capture.

Authors:  Carrie A Carreño; Kiisa C Nishikawa
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 3.312

7.  Hydrodynamic constraints on prey-capture performance in forward-striking snakes.

Authors:  Sam Van Wassenbergh; Jonathan Brecko; Peter Aerts; Ilona Stouten; Gwen Vanheusden; Andy Camps; Raoul Van Damme; Anthony Herrel
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 4.118

8.  The better to eat you with: the comparative feeding morphology of phocid seals (Pinnipedia, Phocidae).

Authors:  Sarah S Kienle; Annalisa Berta
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 2.610

9.  Finding the weakest link: mechanical sensitivity in a fish cranial linkage system.

Authors:  A Baumgart; P Anderson
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 2.963

10.  A new theoretical performance landscape for suction feeding reveals adaptive kinematics in a natural population of reef damselfish.

Authors:  Roi Holzman; Tal Keren; Moshe Kiflawi; Christopher H Martin; Victor China; Ofri Mann; Karin H Olsson
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2022-07-04       Impact factor: 3.308

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.