Literature DB >> 21672823

Suction feeding mechanics, performance, and diversity in fishes.

Peter Wainwright1, Andrew M Carroll, David C Collar, Steven W Day, Timothy E Higham, Roi A Holzman.   

Abstract

Despite almost 50 years of research on the functional morphology and biomechanics of suction feeding, no consensus has emerged on how to characterize suction-feeding performance, or its morphological basis. We argue that this lack of unity in the literature is due to an unusually indirect and complex linkage between the muscle contractions that power suction feeding, the skeletal movements that underlie buccal expansion, the sharp drop in buccal suction pressure that occurs during expansion, the flow of water that enters the mouth to eliminate the pressure gradient, and the forces that are ultimately exerted on the prey by this flow. This complexity has led various researchers to focus individually on suction pressure, flow velocity, or the distance the prey moves as metrics of suction-feeding performance. We attempt to integrate a mechanistic view of the ability of fish to perform these components of suction feeding. We first discuss a model that successfully relates aspects of cranial morphology to the capacity to generate suction pressure in the buccal cavity. This model is a particularly valuable tool for studying the evolution of the feeding mechanism. Second, we illustrate the multidimensional nature of suction-feeding performance in a comparison of bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus, and largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides, two species that represent opposite ends of the spectrum of performance in suction feeding. As anticipated, bluegills had greater accuracy, lower peak flux into the mouth, and higher flow velocity and acceleration of flow than did bass. While the differences between species in accuracy of strike and peak water flux were substantial, peak suction velocity and acceleration were only about 50% higher in bluegill, a relatively modest difference. However, a hydrodynamic model of the forces that suction feeders exert on their prey shows that this difference in velocity is amplified by a positive effect of the smaller mouth aperture of bluegill on force exerted on the prey. Our model indicates that the pressure gradient in front of a fish that is feeding by suction, associated with the gradient in water velocity, results in a force on the prey that is larger than drag or acceleration reaction. A smaller mouth aperture results in a steeper pressure gradient that exerts a greater force on the prey, even when other features of the suction flow are held constant. Our work shows that some aspects of suction-feeding performance can be determined from morphology, but that the complexity of the behavior requires a diversity of perspectives to be used in order to adequately characterize performance.

Entities:  

Year:  2007        PMID: 21672823     DOI: 10.1093/icb/icm032

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Integr Comp Biol        ISSN: 1540-7063            Impact factor:   3.326


  28 in total

1.  Replicated divergence in cichlid radiations mirrors a major vertebrate innovation.

Authors:  Matthew D McGee; Brant C Faircloth; Samuel R Borstein; Jimmy Zheng; C Darrin Hulsey; Peter C Wainwright; Michael E Alfaro
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  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

3.  Jaw protrusion enhances forces exerted on prey by suction feeding fishes.

Authors:  Roi Holzman; Steven W Day; Rita S Mehta; Peter C Wainwright
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 4.118

Review 4.  Aquatic suction feeding dynamics: insights from computational modelling.

Authors:  Sam Van Wassenbergh; Peter Aerts
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2009-02-06       Impact factor: 4.118

5.  Use of computational fluid dynamics to study forces exerted on prey by aquatic suction feeders.

Authors:  Tyler Skorczewski; Angela Cheer; Samson Cheung; Peter C Wainwright
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2009-08-12       Impact factor: 4.118

6.  Hydrodynamic starvation in first-feeding larval fishes.

Authors:  Victor China; Roi Holzman
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  A promising future for integrative biodiversity research: an increased role of scale-dependency and functional biology.

Authors:  S A Price; L Schmitz
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 8.  Speciation through the lens of biomechanics: locomotion, prey capture and reproductive isolation.

Authors:  Timothy E Higham; Sean M Rogers; R Brian Langerhans; Heather A Jamniczky; George V Lauder; William J Stewart; Christopher H Martin; David N Reznick
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Muscle-induced loading as an important source of variation in craniofacial skeletal shape.

Authors:  Andrew J Conith; Daniel T Lam; R Craig Albertson
Journal:  Genesis       Date:  2018-12-24       Impact factor: 2.487

10.  Rapid pivot feeding in pipefish: flow effects on prey and evaluation of simple dynamic modelling via computational fluid dynamics.

Authors:  Sam Van Wassenbergh; Peter Aerts
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2008-11-06       Impact factor: 4.118

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.