Literature DB >> 26511043

Damsel in distress: captured damselfish prey emit chemical cues that attract secondary predators and improve escape chances.

Oona M Lönnstedt1, Mark I McCormick2.   

Abstract

In aquatic environments, many prey animals possess damage-released chemical alarm cues that elicit antipredator behaviours in responsive con- and heterospecifics. Despite considerable study, the selective advantage of alarm cues remains unclear. In an attempt to investigate one of the more promising hypotheses concerning the evolution of alarm cues, we examined whether the cue functions in a fashion analogous to the distress vocalizations emitted by many terrestrial animals. Our results suggest that chemical alarm cues in damselfish (Pomacentridae) may have evolved to benefit the cue sender by attracting secondary predators who disrupt the predation event, allowing the prey a greater chance to escape. The coral reef piscivore, the dusky dottyback (Pseudochromis fuscus), chemically eavesdrops on predation events and uses chemical alarm cues from fish prey (lemon damselfish; Pomacentrus moluccensis) in an attempt to find and steal prey from primary predators. Field studies showed that Ps. fuscus aggregate at sites where prey alarm cue has been experimentally released. Furthermore, secondary predators attempted to steal captured prey of primary predators in laboratory trials and enhanced prey escape chances by 35-40%. These results are the first, to the best of our knowledge, to demonstrate a mechanism by which marine fish may benefit from the production and release of alarm cues, and highlight the complex and important role that semiochemicals play in marine predator-prey interactions.
© 2015 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  alarm calls; chemical alarm cue; foraging behaviour; kleptoparasitism; predator–prey interactions; prey stealing

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26511043      PMCID: PMC4650161          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2015.2038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  10 in total

1.  Learn and live: predator experience and feeding history determines prey behaviour and survival.

Authors:  Oona M Lönnstedt; Mark I McCormick; Mark G Meekan; Maud C O Ferrari; Douglas P Chivers
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Well-informed foraging: damage-released chemical cues of injured prey signal quality and size to predators.

Authors:  Oona M Lonnstedt; Mark I McCormick; Douglas P Chivers
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Distress calls may honestly signal bird quality to predators.

Authors:  Paola Laiolo; José L Tella; Martina Carrete; David Serrano; Guillermo López
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-12-07       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Cues for eavesdroppers: do frog calls indicate prey density and quality?

Authors:  Ximena E Bernal; Rachel A Page; A Stanley Rand; Michael J Ryan
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2007-01-11       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  Field verification of predator attraction to minnow alarm substance.

Authors:  Brian D Wisenden; Travis A Thiel
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.626

6.  Influence of prey body characteristics and performance on predator selection.

Authors:  Thomas H Holmes; Mark I McCormick
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2008-11-19       Impact factor: 3.225

7.  Epidermal 'alarm substance' cells of fishes maintained by non-alarm functions: possible defence against pathogens, parasites and UVB radiation.

Authors:  Douglas P Chivers; Brian D Wisenden; Carrie J Hindman; Tracy A Michalak; Robin C Kusch; Susan G W Kaminskyj; Kristin L Jack; Maud C O Ferrari; Robyn J Pollock; Colin F Halbgewachs; Michael S Pollock; Shireen Alemadi; Clayton T James; Rachel K Savaloja; Cameron P Goater; Amber Corwin; Reehan S Mirza; Joseph M Kiesecker; Grant E Brown; James C Adrian; Patrick H Krone; Andrew R Blaustein; Alicia Mathis
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-10-22       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Social facilitation of selective mortality.

Authors:  Mark I McCormick; Mark G Meekan
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.499

9.  Individual consistency in the behaviors of newly-settled reef fish.

Authors:  James R White; Mark G Meekan; Mark I McCormick
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 2.984

10.  Degrading habitats and the effect of topographic complexity on risk assessment.

Authors:  Mark I McCormick; Oona M Lönnstedt
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 2.912

  10 in total
  3 in total

1.  Disrupted learning: habitat degradation impairs crucial antipredator responses in naive prey.

Authors:  Mark I McCormick; Oona M Lönnstedt
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Coral reef fish predator maintains olfactory acuity in degraded coral habitats.

Authors:  Michael Natt; Oona M Lönnstedt; Mark I McCormick
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Perch, Perca fluviatilis show a directional preference for, but do not increase attacks toward, prey in response to water-borne cortisol.

Authors:  Lindsay J Henderson; Mary R Ryan; Hannah M Rowland
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-10-03       Impact factor: 2.984

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.