Literature DB >> 29167364

Fear of predation shapes social network structure and the acquisition of foraging information in guppy shoals.

Matthew J Hasenjager1,2, Lee A Dugatkin3.   

Abstract

Spatio-temporal variation in predation risk is predicted to select for plastic anti-predator responses, which may in turn impact the fine-scale social structure of prey groups and processes mediated by that structure. To test these predictions, we manipulated the ambient predation risk experienced by Trinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata) groups before quantifying their social networks and recording individual latencies to approach and solve a novel foraging task. High-risk conditions drove the formation of social networks that were more strongly assorted by body size than those exposed to low ambient risk and promoted longer durations of contact between preferred partners. Additionally, high background predation risk reduced the probability individuals would approach and solve a novel foraging task. Network-based diffusion analysis revealed that while social transmission of the task solution from knowledgeable to naive individuals occurred at a higher rate within low-risk groups, individuals in high-risk groups were particularly likely to investigate the task while shoaling with preferred social partners. Taken together, our results suggest that the structure and functional importance of prey social networks may partly depend on local predation pressure. Furthermore, by influencing individuals' access to information, fear of predation may impact decision-making in a potentially wide array of behavioural contexts.
© 2017 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  assortment; neophobia; network-based diffusion analysis; predation risk; social learning strategies; social transmission

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29167364      PMCID: PMC5719178          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.2020

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


  33 in total

Review 1.  Social learning strategies.

Authors:  Kevin N Laland
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 1.986

2.  Network metrics reveal differences in social organization between two fission-fusion species, Grevy's zebra and onager.

Authors:  Siva R Sundaresan; Ilya R Fischhoff; Jonathan Dushoff; Daniel I Rubenstein
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2006-09-09       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Interspecific social learning: novel preference can be acquired from a competing species.

Authors:  Janne-Tuomas Seppänen; Jukka T Forsman
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2007-07-05       Impact factor: 10.834

4.  Revealing the hidden networks of interaction in mobile animal groups allows prediction of complex behavioral contagion.

Authors:  Sara Brin Rosenthal; Colin R Twomey; Andrew T Hartnett; Hai Shan Wu; Iain D Couzin
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-03-30       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Predatory fish select for coordinated collective motion in virtual prey.

Authors:  C C Ioannou; V Guttal; I D Couzin
Journal:  Science       Date:  2012-08-16       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Background level of risk determines how prey categorize predators and non-predators.

Authors:  Douglas P Chivers; Mark I McCormick; Matthew D Mitchell; Ryan A Ramasamy; Maud C O Ferrari
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Diffusion of foraging innovations in the guppy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Anim Behav       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.844

8.  Individual personalities predict social behaviour in wild networks of great tits (Parus major).

Authors:  L M Aplin; D R Farine; J Morand-Ferron; E F Cole; A Cockburn; B C Sheldon
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 9.492

9.  Behavioural phenotype affects social interactions in an animal network.

Authors:  Thomas W Pike; Madhumita Samanta; Jan Lindström; Nick J Royle
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-11-07       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  How predation shapes the social interaction rules of shoaling fish.

Authors:  James E Herbert-Read; Emil Rosén; Alex Szorkovszky; Christos C Ioannou; Björn Rogell; Andrea Perna; Indar W Ramnarine; Alexander Kotrschal; Niclas Kolm; Jens Krause; David J T Sumpter
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  4 in total

1.  Fear of predation shapes social network structure and the acquisition of foraging information in guppy shoals.

Authors:  Matthew J Hasenjager; Lee A Dugatkin
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Network-based diffusion analysis reveals context-specific dominance of dance communication in foraging honeybees.

Authors:  Matthew J Hasenjager; William Hoppitt; Ellouise Leadbeater
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 14.919

3.  Disturbance cue communication is shaped by emitter diet and receiver background risk in Trinidadian guppies.

Authors:  Jack A Goldman; Adam L Crane; Laurence E A Feyten; Emily Collins; Grant E Brown
Journal:  Curr Zool       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 2.734

4.  Tutors do not facilitate rapid resource exploitation in temporary tadpole aggregations.

Authors:  Zoltán Tóth; Boglárka Jaloveczki
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2021-05-12       Impact factor: 2.963

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.