Predation and the evolution of prey behavior: An experiment with tree hole mosquitoes

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 301-311

  Juliano, Steven A ^a,b   Gravel, Marc E ^a  

^a ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND   (Canada)

Author keywords

Activity; Aedes triseriatus; Behavioral responses; Constitutive behavior; Facultative antipredator behavior; Feeding behavior; Predation; Predator avoidance behavior; Toxorhynchites rutilus

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; EVOLUTION; FACULTATIVE BEHAVIOR; PHYTOTELMIC ECOSYSTEM; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION;

AEDES TRISERIATUS; CULICIDAE; DIPTERA; INSECTA; OCHLEROTATUS TRISERIATUS; RUTILUS; TOXORHYNCHITES; TOXORHYNCHITES RUTILUS;

EID: 0036558643     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/13.3.301     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Ball SL, Baker RL, 1995. The nonlethal effects of predators and the influence of food availability on life history of adult Chironomus tentans (Diptera: Chironomidae). Freshwater Biol 34:1-12.
2. Ball SL, Baker RL, 1996. Predator-induced life history changes: Antipredator behavior costs or facultative life history shifts? Ecology 77: 1116-1124.
3. Blumstein DT, Daniel JC, Griffin AS, Evans CS, 2000. Insular tammar wallabies (Macropus eugenii) respond to visual but not acoustic cues from predators. Behav Ecol 5:528-535.
4. Boersma M, Spaak P, DeMeester L, 1998. Predator-mediated plasticity in morphology, life history, and behavior of Daphnia: The uncoupling of responses. Am Nat 152:237-248.
5. Bradshaw WE, Holzapfel CM, 1983. Predator-mediated, non-equilibrium coexistence of tree-hole mosquitoes in southeastern North America. Oecologia 57:239-256.
6. Bradshaw WE, Holzapfel CM, 1985. The distribution and abundance of treehole mosquitoes in eastern North America: Perspectives from north Florida. In: Ecology of Mosquitoes: Proceedings of a Workshop (Lounibos LP, Rey JR, Frank JH, eds). Vero Beach, Florida: Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory; 3-23.
7. Chippindale AK, Hoang DT, Service PM, Rose MR, 1994. The evolution of development in Drosophila melanogaster selected for postponed senescence. Evolution 48:1880-1899.
8. Gilliam JF, Fraser DF, 1987. Habitat selection under predation hazard: Test of a model with foraging minnows. Ecology 68:1856-1862.
9. Goodnight CJ, Craig DM, 1997. The effect of coexistence on competitive outcome in Tribolium castaneum and Tribolium confusum. Evolution 50:1241-1250.
10. Grill CP, Juliano SA, 1996. Predicting species interactions based on behaviour: Predation and competition in container dwelling mosquitoes. J Anim Ecol 65:63-76.
11. Grostal P, Dicke M, 1999. Direct and indirect cues to predation risk influence behavior and reproduction of prey: A case for acarine interactions. Behav Ecol 10:422-427.
12. Hatcher L, Stepanski EJ, 1994. A Step-by-Step Approach to Using the SAS System for Univariate and Multivariate Analyses. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute.
13. Hechtel LJ, Juliano SA, 1997. Effects of a predator on prey metamorphosis: Plastic responses by prey or selective mortality? Ecology 78: 838-851.
14. Hoffman AA, 2000. Laboratory and field heritabilities. Some lessons from Drosophila. In: Adaptive Genetic Variation in the Wild (Mousseau TA, Sinervo B, Endler J, eds). New York: Oxford University Press; 200-219.
15. Joshi A, Mueller LD, 1988. Directional and stabilizing density-dependent natural selection for pupation height in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 47:176-184.
16. Juliano SA, 1996. Geographic variation in Aedes triseriatus (Diptera: Culicidae): Temperature-dependent effects of a predator on survival of larvae. Environ Entomol 25:624-631.
17. Juliano SA, Hechtel LJ, Waters JR, 1993. Behavior and risk of predation in larval tree hole mosquitoes: Effects of hunger and population history of predation. Oikos 68:229-241.
18. Juliano SA, Reminger L, 1992. The relationship between vulnerability to predation and behavior of larval tree hole mosquitoes: Geographic and ontogenetic differences. Oikos 63:465-476.
19. Lawler SP, 1989. Behavioral responses to predators and predation risk in four species of larval anurans. Anim Behav 381:1039-1047.
20. Lima SL, Dill LM, 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: A review and prospectus. Can J Zool 68:619-640.
21. Linley JR, Darling K, 1993. Search behaviour associated ,with egg cannibalism in Toxorhynchites amboinensis and Toxorhynchites rutilus rutilus (Diptera: Culicidae). J Med Entomol 30:561-570.
22. Lounibos LP, Escher RL, Nishimura N, Juliano SA, 1997. Long-term dynamics of a predator used for biological control and decoupling from mosquito prey in a subtropical treehole ecosystem. Oecologia 111:189-200.
23. Main KL, 1987. Predator avoidance in seagrass meadows: Prey behavior, microhabitat selection, and cryptic coloration. Ecology 68:170-180.
24. Martin P, Bateson P, 1986. Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. McPeek MA, 1990. Behavioral differences between Enallagma species (Odonata) influencing vulnerability to predators. Ecology 71:1714-1726.
26. Mousseau TA, Roff DA, 1987. Natural selection and the heritability of fitness components. Heredity 59:181-197.
27. Mueller LD, 1988. Density-dependent population growth and natural selection in food limited environments: The Drosophila model. Am Nat 132:786-809.
28. Novak RJ, Shroyer DA, 1978. Eggs of Aedes triseriatus and A. hendersoni: A method to stimulate optimal hatch. Mosq News 38:515-521.
29. Peckarsky BL, Wilcox RS, 1989. Stonefly nymphs use hydrodynamic cues to discriminate between prey. Oecologia 79:265-270.
30. Rose MR, 1984. Laboratory evolution of postponed senescence in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 38:1004-1010.
31. Rose MR, Graves JL, Hutchinson EW, 1990. The use of selection to probe patterns of pleiotropy in fitness characters. In: Insect Life Cycles: Genetics, Evolution, and Co-ordination (Gilbert F, ed). London: Springer-Verlag; 29-42.
32. Rose MR, Nusbaum TJ, Chippindale AK, 1996. Laboratory evolution: The experimental wonderland and the Cheshire cat syndrome. In: Adaptation (Rose MR, Laudner GV, eds). New York: Academic Press; 221-241.
33. Rubio Y, Rodrguez D, Machado-Allison CE, León JA, 1980. Algunos apectos del comportamiento de Toxorhynchites theobaldi (Diptera: Culicidae). Acta Cient Venez 31:345-351.
34. Russo R, 1986. Comparison of predatory behavior in five species of Toxorhynchites (Diptera: Culicidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 79:715-722.
35. SAS Institute, 1990. SAS/STAT Users Guide, Version 6, 4th Ed., vols. 1 and 2. Cary, North Carolina: SAS Institute.
36. Scheiner SM, 1993. MANOVA: Multiple response variables and multispecies interactions. In: Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments (Scheiner SM, Gurevitch J, eds). New York: Chapman and Hall; 94-112.
37. Sih A, 1980. Optimal behavior: Can foragers balance two conflicting demands? Science 210:1041-1043.
38. Sih A, 1986. Antipredator responses and the perception of danger in mosquito larvae. Ecology 67:434-441.
39. Sih A, 1987. Predator and prey lifestyles: An evolutionary and ecological overview. In: Predation: Direct and Indirect Impacts on Aquatic Communities (Kerfoot WC, Sih A, eds). Hanover, New Hampshre: University Press of New England; 203-224.
40. Sims SR, 1985. Embryonic and larval diapause in Aedes triseriatus: Phenotypic correlation and ecological consequences of the induction response. In: Ecology of Mosquitoes: Proceedings of a Worksho. (Lounibos LP, ReyJR, Frank, JH, eds.) Vero Beach, Florida: Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory; 359-369.
41. Skelly DK, Werner EE, 1990. Behavior and life historical responses of larval American toads to an odonate predator. Ecology 71:2313-2322.
42. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ, 1995. Biometry, 3rd Ed. New York: W.H. Freeman.
43. Steffan WA, Evenhuis NL, 1981. Biology of Toxorhynchites. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 26:159-181.
44. Stein RA, Magnuson JJ, 1976. Behavioral response of a crayfish to a fish predator. Ecology 57:751-761.
45. Tikkanen P, Moutka T, Huhta A, 1996. Fishless-stream mayflies express behavioural flexibility in response to predatory fish. Anim Behav 51:1391-1399.
46. Watkins TB, 1996. Predator-mediated selection on burst swimming-performance in tadpoles of the Pacific tree frog, Pseudacris redilla. Physiol Zool 69:154-167.
47. Wisenden BD, Cline A, Sparkes TC, 1999. Survival benefit to antipredator behavior in the amphipod Gammarus minus (Crustacea: Amphipoda) in response to injury-released chemical cues from conspecifics and heterospecifics. Ethology 105:407-414.
48. Woodward BD, 1983. Predator-prey interactions and breeding pond use of temporary pond species in a desert anuran community. Ecology 64:1549-1555.
49. Zwaan B, Bijlsma R, Hoekstra RF, 1995. Artificial selection for development time in Drosophila melanogaster in relation to the evolution of aging: Direct and correlated responses. Evolution 49:635-648.