Embryonic experience to predation risk affects tadpoles of the common frog (Rana temporaria)

Archiv fur Hydrobiologie

Volumn 166, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 505-523

  Saglio, Philippe ^a   Mandrillon, Anne Lise ^a  

^a CEMAGREF   (France)

Author keywords

Amphibians; Development; Induced defences; Morphological changes; Predator cues

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; CHEMICAL CUE; DATA SET; DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE; EGG PRODUCTION; EMBRYONIC DEVELOPMENT; FROG; LABORATORY METHOD; LARVAL DEVELOPMENT; OLFACTION; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; PREDATION RISK;

AMBYSTOMA MACULATUM; AMPHIBIA; ANURA; ASTACOIDEA; PONTASTACUS LEPTODACTYLUS; RANA TEMPORARIA; SALAMANDRA SALAMANDRA; SALAMANDROIDEA;

EID: 33748757226     PISSN: 00039136     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1127/0003-9136/2006/0166-0505     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. ANHOLT, B. R., SKELLY, D. K. & WERNER, E. E. (1996): Factors modifying antipredator behavior in larval toads. - Herpetologica 52: 301-313.
2. ARRIGNON, J. C. V. (1997): Status of the foreign crayfish in France. - In: MOMOT, W. T. (ed.): Freshwater Crayfish 11. - Proc. Internat. Assoc. Astacol., Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada, pp. 665-670,
3. BABBITT, K. J. (2001): Behaviour and growth of Southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala) tadpoles: effects of food and predation risk. - Can. J. Zool. 79: 809-814.
4. BARDSLEY, L. & BEEBEE, T. J. C. (1998): Interspecific competition between larvae is not an important structuring force in mixed communities of Rana and Bufo on a sand-dune system. - Ecography 21: 449-456.
5. CHIVERS, D. P., KIESECKER, J. M., MARCO, A., DE VITO, J., ANDERSON, M. T. & BLAUSTEIN, A. R. (2001): Predator induced life history changes in amphibians: egg predation induces hatching. - Oikos 92: 135-142.
6. CHIVERS, D. P. & MIRZA, R. S. (2001): Importance of predator diet cues in responses of larval wood frogs to fish and invertebrate predators. - J. Chem. Ecol. 27: 45-51.
7. CHIVERS, D. P. & SMITH, R. J. F. (1994 a): Fathead minnows, Pimephales promelas, acquire predator recognition when alarm substance is associated with the sight of unfamiliar fish. - Anim. Behav. 48: 597-605.
8. _ (1994b): The role of experience and chemical alarm signalling in predator recognition by fathead minnows, Pimephales promelas. - J. Fish Biol. 44: 273-285.
9. GALLIE, J. A., MUMME, R. L. & WISSINGER, S. A. (2001): Experience has no effect on the development of chemosensory recognition of predators by tadpoles of American toad, Bufo americanus. - Herpetologica 57: 376-383.
10. GOSNER, K. L. (1960): A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. - Herpetologica 16: 183-190.
11. GRIFFITHS, R. A., SCHLEY, L., SCHARP, P. E., DENNIS, J. L. & ROMAN, A. (1998): Behavioural responses of Mallorcan midwife toad tadpoles to natural and unnatural snake predators. - Anim. Behav. 36: 125-133.
12. HEPPER, P. G. & WALDMAN, B. (1992): Embryonic olfactory learning in frogs. - Quarterly J. Exp. Psychol. 44B: 179-197.
13. KATS, L. B. & DILL, L. M. (1998): The scent of death: chemosensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. - Ecosciences 5: 361-394.
14. KIESECKER, J. M. & BLAUSTEIN, A. R. (1997): Population differences in response of red-legged frogs (Rana aurora) to introduced bullfrogs. - Ecology 78: 1752-1760.
15. KORPI, N. L. & WISENDEN, B. D. (2001): Learned recognition of novel predator odour by zebra danios, Danio rerio, following time-shifted presentation of alarm cue and predator odour. - Environ. Biol. Fishes 61: 205-211.
16. LARSON, J. K. & MCCORMICK, M. I. (2005): The role of chemical alarm signals in facilitating learned recognition of novel chemical cues in a coral reef fish. - Anim. Behav. 69: 51-57.
17. LAURILA, A., CROCHET, P.-A. & MERILA, J. (2001): Predation-induced effects on hatchling morphology in the common frog (Rana temporaria). - Can. J. Zool. 79: 926-930.
18. LAURILA, A., JARVI-LATURI, M., PAKKASMAA, S. & MERILA J. (2004): Temporal variation in predation risk: stage-dependency, graded responses and fitness costs in tadpole antipredator defences. - Oïkos 107: 90-99.
19. LAURILA, A., KUJASALO, J. & RANTA, A. (1997): Different antipredator behaviour in two anuran tadpoles: effect of predator diet. - Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 40: 329-336.
20. _ (1998): Predator-induced changes in life history in two anuran tadpoles: effects of predator diet. - Oikos 83: 307-317.
21. LAURILA, A., PAKKASMAA, S., CROCHET, P.-A. & MERILA, J. (2002): Predator-induced plasticity in early life history and morphology in two anuran amphibians. - Oecologia 132: 524-530.
22. LAWLER, S. P. (1989): Behavioural responses to predators and predation risk in four species of larval anurans. - Anim. Behav. 38: 1038-1047.
23. LEFCORT, H. (1998): Chemically mediated fright response in Southern toad (Bufo terrestris) tadpoles. - Copeia 2: 445-450.
24. LIMA, S. L. (1998): Nonlethal effects in the ecology of predator - prey interactions. -Biosciences 48: 25-34.
25. LUTHARDT, G. & ROTH, G. (1979): The relationship between stimulus orientation and stimulus movement pattern in the prey catching behavior of Salamandra salamandra. - Copeia 3: 442-447.
26. MCCARTHY, T. M. & DICKEY, B. F. (2002): Chemically mediated effects of injured prey on behavior of both prey and predators. - Behaviour 139: 585-602.
27. MCCOLLUM, S. A. & LEIMBERGER, J. D. (1997): Predator - induced morphological changes in an amphibian: predation by dragonflies affects tadpoles shape and color. - Oecologia 109: 615-621.
28. MANDRILLON, A.-L. & SAGLIO, P. (2005): Prior exposure to conspecific chemical cues affects predator recognition in larval common toad (Bufo bufo). - Arch. Hydrobiol. 164: 1-12.
29. MARQUIS, O., SAGLIO, P. & NEVEU, A. (2004): Effects of predators and conspecific chemical cues on the swimming activity of Rana temporaria and Bufo bufo tadpoles. - Arch. Hydrobiol. 160: 153-170.
30. MATHIS, A., MURRAY, K. L. & HICKMAN, C. R. (2003): Do experience and body size play a role in responses of larval ringed salamanders, Ambystoma annulatum, to predator kairomones? Laboratory and field assays. - Ethology 109: 159-170.
31. MOORE, P. A. & GRILLS, J. L. (1999): Chemical orientation to food by the crayfish Orconectes rusticus: influence of hydrodynamics. - Anim. Behav. 58: 953-963.
32. MOORE, R. D., NEWTON, B. & SIH, A. (1996): Delayed hatching as a response of streamside salamander eggs to chemical cues from predatory sunfish. - Oikos 77: 331-335.
33. NYSTRÖM, P. & ABJÖRNSSON, K. (2000): Effects of fish chemical cues on the interactions between tadpoles and crayfish. - Oikos 88: 181-190.
34. ORIZAOLA, G. & BRANA, F. (2004): Hatching responses of four newt species to predatory fish chemical cues. - Ann. Zool. Fen. 41: 635-645.
35. _ (2005): Plasticity in newt metamorphosis: the effect of predation at embryonic and larval stage. - Freshwat. Biol. 50: 438-446.
36. PETRANKA, J. W. & HAYES, L. (1998): Chemically-mediated avoidance of a predatory odonate (Anax junius) by American toad (Bufo americanus) and wood frog (Rana sylvatica) tadpoles. - Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 42: 263-271.
37. RELYEA, R. A. (2001): Morphological and behavioral plasticity of larval anurans in response to different predators. - Ecology 82: 523-540.
38. _ (2003): How prey respond to combined predators: a review and an empirical test. - Ecology 84: 1827-1839.
39. ROWE, L. & LUDWIG, D. (1991): Size and timing of metamorphosis in complex life cycles: time constraints and variation. - Ecology 72: 413-427.
40. SAENZ, D., JOHNSON, J. B., ADAMS, C. K. & DAYTON, G. H. (2003): Accelerated hatching of Southern leopard frog (Rana sphenocephala) eggs in response to the presence of a crayfish (Procambarus nigrocinctus) predator. - Copeia 3: 646-649.
41. SCHALK, G., FORBES, M. R. & WEATHERHEAD, P. J. (2002): Developmental plasticity and growth rates of green frog (Rana clamitans) embryos and tadpoles in relation to a leech (Macrobdella decora) predator. - Copeia 2: 445-449.
42. SIH, A. & MOORE, R. D. (1993): Delayed hatching of salamander eggs in response to enhanced larval predation risk. - Amer. Nat. 142: 947-960.
43. SKELLY, D. K. (1994): Activity level and the susceptibility of anuran larvae to predation. - Anim. Behav. 47: 465-468.
44. SOKAL, R. R. & ROHLF, F. J. (1981): Biometry: the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. - W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco.
45. TREMBATH, R. & ANHOLT, B. R. (2001): Predator - induced morphological and behavioural changes in a temporary pool vertebrate. - Isr. J. Zool. 47: 419-431.
46. VAN BUSKIRK, J. (2001): Specific induced responses to different predator species in anuran larvae. - J. Evol. Biol. 14: 482-489.
47. _ (2002): Phenotypic lability and the evolution of predator-induced plasticity in tadpoles. - Evolution 56: 361-370.
48. VAN BUSKIRK, J. & ARIOLI, M. G. (2002): Dosage response of an induced defence: how sensitive are tadpoles to predation risk? - Ecology 83:1580-1585.
49. WARKENTIN, K. M. (1995): Adaptive plasticity in hatching age: a response to predation risk trade-offs. - Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 92: 3507-3510.
50. WERNER, E. E. (1986): Amphibian metamorphosis: growth rate, predation risk, and the optimal size at transformation. - Amer. Nat. 128: 319-341.
51. WILSON, D. J. & LEFCORT, H. (1993): The effect of predator diet on the alarm response of red-legged frog, Rana aurora, tadpoles. - Anim. Behav. 46: 1017-1019.