Kleptoparasitic prey competition in shoaling fish: Effects of familiarity and prey distribution

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 17, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 959-964

  Webster, Michael M ^a   Hart, Paul J B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEICESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Flock; Foraging; Scrounging behavior; Shoal; Threespine stickleback

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; FAMILIARITY; FISH; MONITORING; PREY SELECTION;

ANIMALIA; GASTEROSTEUS ACULEATUS;

EID: 33749531519     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arl037     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Amat JA, Obeso JR. 1991. Black coots (Fulica atra, Aves, Rallidae) supplanting conspecifics from foraging sites. Ethology 87:1-8.
2. Barnard CJ, Burk T. 1979. Dominance hierarchies and the evolution of individual recognition. J Theor Biol 81:65-73.
3. Barnard CJ, Sibly RM. 1981. Producers and scroungers: a general model and its application to captive flocks of house sparrows. Anim Behav 29:543-55.
4. Bell AM. 2005. Behavioral differences between individuals and two populations of stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). J Evol Biol 18:464-73.
5. Bell AM, Stamps JA. 2004. Development of behavioral differences between individuals and populations of sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. Anim Behav 68:1339-48.
6. Broom M, Ruxton GD. 2003. Evolutionarily stable kleptoparasitism: consequences of different prey types. Behav Ecol 14:23-33.
7. Candolin U. 1997. Predation risk affects courtship and attractiveness of competing threespine stickleback males. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 41:81-7.
8. Charnov EL. 1976. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor Popul Biol 9:129-36.
9. Chivers DP, Brown GE, Smith RJF. 1995. Familiarity and shoal cohesion in fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas)-implications for antipredator behavior. Can J Zool Rev Can Zool 73:955-60.
10. Coolen I. 2002. Increasing foraging group size increases scrounger use and reduces searching efficiency in nutmeg mannikins (Lonchura punctulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 52:232-8.
11. De Vries H. 1998. Finding a dominance order most consistent with a linear hierarchy: a new procedure and review. Anim Behav 55: 827-43.
12. Dugatkin LA, Earley RL. 2004. Individual recognition, dominance hierarchies and winner and loser effects. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 271:1537-40.
13. Flecker AS. 1992. Fish predation and the evolution of invertebrate drift periodicity-evidence from neotropical streams. Ecology 73:438-48.
14. Gill AB, Hart PJB. 1994. Feeding behaviour and prey choice in threespined sticklebacks: the interacting effects of prey size, fish size and stomach fullness. Anim Behav 47:921-32.
15. Gill AB, Hart PJB. 1998. Stomach capacity as a directing factor in prey size selection of three-spined stickleback. J Fish Biol 53:897-900.
16. Giraldeau L-A, Caraco T. 2000. Social foraging theory. Monographs in behavior and ecology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17. Griffiths SW. 2003. Learned recognition of conspecifics by fishes. Fish Fisheries 4:256-68.
18. Griffiths SW, Ward AJW. Forthcoming. Learned recognition of conspecifics. In: Brown C, Laland K, Krause J, editors. Fish learning and behaviour.
19. Ha RR, Ha JC. 2003. Effects of ecology and prey characteristics on the use of alternative social foraging tactics in crows, Corvus caurinus. Anim Behav 66:309-16.
20. Hart PJB, Gill AB. 1992. Constraints on prey size selection by the 3-spine stickleback-energy-requirements and the capacity and fullness of the gut. J Fish Biol 40:205-18.
21. Höjesjö J, Johnsson JI, Petersson E, Jarvi T. 1998. The importance of being familiar: individual recognition and social behavior in sea trout (Salmo trutta). Behav Ecol 9:445-51.
22. Hollis KL, Dumas MJ, Singh P, Fackelman P. 1995. Pavlovian conditioning of aggressive behavior in blue gourami fish (Trichogaster trichopterus)-winners stay winners and losers stay losers. J Comp Psychol 109:123-33.
23. Huntingford FA. 1976. The relationship between anti-predator behaviour and aggression among conspecifics in threespine sticklebacks. Anim Behav 24:245-60.
24. Jakobsson S, Brick O, Kullberg C. 1995. Escalated fighting behaviour incurs increased predation risk. Anim Behav 49:235-9.
25. Kelly CD, Godin J-GJ. 2001. Predation risk reduces male-male sexual competition in the Trinidadian guppy (Poecilia reticulata). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 51:95-100.
26. Lachlan RF, Crooks L, Laland K. 1998. Who follows whom? Shoaling preferences and social learning of foraging information in guppies. Anim Behav 56:181-90.
27. Laland KN, Williams K. 1997. Shoaling generates social learning of foraging information in guppies. Anim Behav 53:1161-9.
28. Langley R. 1979. Practical statistics simply explained. New York: Pan Books.
29. McCarthy ID. 2001. Competitive ability is related to metabolic asymmetry in juvenile rainbow trout. J Fish Biol 59:1002-14.
30. Metcalfe NB, Thomson BC. 1995. Fish recognize and prefer to shoal with poor competitors. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 259:207-10.
31. Mottley K, Giraldeau LA. 2000. Experimental evidence that group foragers can converge on predicted producer-scrounger equilibria. Anim Behav 60:341-50.
32. Rafacz M, Templeton JJ. 2003. Environmental unpredictability and the value of social information for foraging starlings. Ethology 109: 951-60.
33. Seppa T, Laurila A, Peuhkuri N, Piironen J, Lower N. 2001. Early familiarity has fitness consequences for Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) juveniles. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58:1380-5.
34. Sirot D. 2000. An evolutionarily stable strategy for aggressiveness in feeding groups. Behav Ecol 11:351-6.
35. Sloman KA, Taylor AC, Metcalfe NB, Gilmour KM. 2001. Effects of an environmental perturbation on the social behaviour and physiological function of brown trout. Anim Behav 61:325-33.
36. Sloman KA, Wilson L, Freel JA, Taylor AC, Metcalfe NB, Gilmour KM. 2002. The effects of increased flow rates on linear dominance hierarchies and physiological function in brown trout, Salmo trutta. Can J Zool Rev Can Zool 80:1221-7.
37. Slotow R, Paxinos E. 1997. Intraspecific competition influences food return-predation risk trade-off by White-crowned sparrows. Condor 93:642-50.
38. Smith RD, Ruxton GD, Cresswell W. 2002. Do kleptoparasites reduce their own foraging effort in order to detect kleptoparasitic opportunities? An empirical test of a key assumption of kleptoparasitic models. Oikos 97:205-12.
39. Soma M, Hasegawa T. 2004. The effect of social facilitation and social dominance on foraging success of budgerigars in an unfamiliar environment. Behaviour 141:1121-34.
40. Stephens DW, Krebs JR. 1986. Foraging theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41. Swaney W, Kendal J, Capon H, Brown C, Laland KN. 2001. Familiarity facilitates social learning of foraging behaviour in the guppy. Anim Behav 62:591-8.
42. Utne-Palm AC, Hart PJB. 2000. The effects of familiarity on competitive interactions between threespined sticklebacks. Oikos 91: 225-32.
43. Vickery WL, Giraldeau L-A, Templeton JJ, Kramer DL, Chapman CA. 1991. Producers, scroungers and group-foraging. Am Nat 137: 847-63.
44. Ward AJW, Hart PJB. 2003. The effects of kin and familiarity on interactions between fish. Fish Fisheries 4:348-58.
45. Ward AJW, Hart PJB, Krause J. 2004. The effects of habitat- and diet-based cues on association preferences in three-spined sticklebacks. Behav Ecol 15:925-9.
46. Ward AJW, Holbrook RI, Krause J, Hart PJB. 2005. Social recognition in sticklebacks: the role of direct experience and habitat cues. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 57:575-83.
47. Ward AJW, Thomas P, Hart PJB, Krause J. 2004. Correlates of boldness in three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 55:561-8.
48. Ward AJW, Webster MM, Hart PJB. Intraspecific food competition in fishes. Fish Fisheries. Forthcoming.
49. Webster MM, Hart PJB. 2004. Substrate discrimination and preference in foraging fish. Anim Behav 68:1071-7.
50. Webster MM, Hart PJB. 2006. Subhabitat selection by foraging fish: previous experience and social conformity. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60:77-86.