Costs and benefits of defences induced by predators differing in dangerousness

Journal of Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 1007-1019

  Hettyey, A ^a,b   Vincze, K ^b   Zsarnoczai S ^b   Hoi, H ^a   Laurila, A ^c  

^a KONRAD LORENZ INSTITUTE FOR ETHOLOGY   (Austria)

^b EÖTVÖS LORÁND UNIVERSITY   (Hungary)

^c UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Induced defence; Mortality rate; Phenotypic plasticity; Predation risk; Predator dangerousness; Tadpole

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE; FITNESS; FROG; INVERTEBRATE; LARVA; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; METAMORPHOSIS; MORPHOLOGY; MORTALITY RISK; PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY; PREDATION RISK; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; SURVIVAL;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; FOOD CHAIN; FROG; HEMIPTERA; LARVA; LEECH; PHENOTYPE; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDATION; SALAMANDER;

ANIMALS; FOOD CHAIN; HEMIPTERA; LARVA; LEECHES; PHENOTYPE; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR; RANIDAE; SALAMANDRIDAE;

ANISOPTERA (DRAGONFLIES); ANURA; HIRUDINIDA; NEPIDAE; RANA DALMATINA; SALAMANDRIDAE; SCORPIONES;

EID: 79955019484     PISSN: 1010061X     EISSN: 14209101     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02233.x     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Altwegg, R. & Reyer, H.U. 2003. Patterns of natural selection on size at metamorphosis in water frogs. Evolution 57: 872-882.
2. Anholt, B.R., Negovetic, S. & Som, C. 1998. Methods for anaesthetizing and marking larval anurans. Herpetol. Rev. 29: 153-154.
3. Benard, M.F. 2004. Predator-induced phenotypic plasticity in organisms with complex life histories. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35: 651-673.
4. Benard, M.F. 2006. Survival trade-offs between two predator-induced phenotypes in Pacific treefrogs (Pseudacris regilla). Ecology 87: 340-346.
5. Biro, P.A., Post, J.R. & Abrahams, M.V. 2005. Ontogeny of energy allocation reveals selective pressure promoting risk-taking behaviour in young fish cohorts. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 272: 1443-1448.
6. Bourdeau, P.E. 2009. Prioritized phenotypic responses to combined predators in a marine snail. Ecology 90: 1659-1669.
7. DeWitt, T.J., Sih, A. & Wilson, D.S. 1998. Costs and limits of phenotypic plasticity. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13: 77-81.
8. Dixon, A.F.G. & Agarwala, B.K. 1999. Ladybird-induced life-history changes in aphids. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 266: 1549-1553.
9. Doherty, P.A., Wassersug, R.J. & Lee, M.J. 1998. Mechanical properties of the tadpole tail fin. J. Exp. Biol. 201: 2691-2699.
10. Eklöv, P. & Werner, E.E. 2000. Multiple predator effects on size-dependent behavior and mortality of two species of anuran larvae. Oikos 88: 250-258.
11. Fraker, M.E. 2008a. The dynamics of predation risk assessment: responses of anuran larvae to chemical cues of predators. J. Anim. Ecol. 77: 638-645.
12. Fraker, M.E. 2008b. The effect of hunger on the strength and duration of the antipredator behavioral response of green frog (Rana clamitans) tadpoles. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 62: 1201-1205.
13. Freeman, A.S. 2007. Specificity of induced defenses in Mytilus edulis and asymmetrical predator deterrence. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 334: 145-153.
14. Freeman, A.S., Meszaros, J. & Byers, J.E. 2009. Poor phenotypic integration of blue mussel inducible defenses in environments with multiple predators. Oikos 118: 758-766.
15. Gosner, K.L. 1960. A simplified table for staging Anuran embryos and larvae with notes on their identification. Herpetologica 16: 183-190.
16. Hammill, E., Rogers, A. & Beckerman, A.P. 2008. Costs, benefits and the evolution of inducible defences: a case study with Daphnia pulex. J. Evol. Biol. 21: 705-715.
17. Harvell, C.D. 1990. The ecology and evolution of inducible defenses. Q. Rev. Biol. 65: 323-340.
18. Hoverman, J.T. & Relyea, R.A. 2009. Survival trade-offs associated with inducible defences in snails: the roles of multiple predators and developmental plasticity. Funct. Ecol. 23: 1179-1188.
19. Hoverman, J.T., Auld, J.R. & Relyea, R.A. 2005. Putting prey back together again: integrating predator-induced behavior, morphology, and life history. Oecologia 144: 481-491.
20. Johnson, J.B., Burt, D.B. & DeWitt, T.J. 2008. Form, function, and fitness: pathways to survival. Evolution 62: 1243-1251.
21. Kishida, O. & Nishimura, K. 2005. Multiple inducible defences against multiple predators in the anuran tadpole, Rana pirica. Evol. Ecol. Res. 7: 619-631.
22. Kusch, J. 1995. Adaptation of inducible defense in Euplotes daidaleos (Ciliophora) to predation risks by various predators. Microb. Ecol. 30: 79-88.
23. Kusch, R.C., Mirza, R.S. & Chivers, D.P. 2004. Making sense of predator scents: investigating the sophistication of predator assessment abilities of fathead minnows. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 55: 551-555.
24. Laurila, A., Kujasalo, J. & Ranta, E. 1998. Predator-induced changes in life history in two anuran tadpoles: effects of predator diet. Oikos 83: 307-317.
25. Laurila, A., Pakkasmaa, S., Crochet, P.A. & Merilä, J. 2002. Predator-induced plasticity in early life history and morphology in two anuran amphibians. Oecologia 132: 524-530.
26. Laurila, A., Pakkasmaa, S. & Merilä, J. 2006. Population divergence in growth rate and antipredator defences in Rana arvalis. Oecologia 147: 585-595.
27. Lima, S.L. 1998. Stress and decision making under the risk of predation: recent developments from behavioral, reproductive, and ecological perspectives. Adv. Study Behav. 27: 215-290.
28. Lima, S.L. & Bednekoff, P.A. 1999. Temporal variation in danger drives antipredator behavior: the predation risk allocation hypothesis. Am. Nat. 153: 649-659.
29. McCollum, S.A. & Van Buskirk, J. 1996. Costs and benefits of a predator-induced polyphenism in the gray treefrog Hyla chrysoscelis. Evolution 50: 583-593.
30. McPeek, M.A. 2004. The growth/predation risk trade-off: so what is the mechanism? Am. Nat. 163: E88-E111.
31. Orizaola, G. & Braña, F. 2003. Oviposition behaviour and vulnerability of eggs to predation in four newt species (Genus Triturus). Herpetol. J. 13: 121-124.
32. Peckarsky, B.L. 1996. Alternative predator avoidance syndromes of stream-dwelling mayfly larvae. Ecology 77: 1888-1905.
33. Relyea, R.A. 2001a. Morphological and behavioral plasticity of larval anurans in response to different predators. Ecology 82: 523-540.
34. Relyea, R.A. 2001b. The relationship between predation risk and antipredator responses in larval anurans. Ecology 82: 541-554.
35. Relyea, R.A. 2002. Local population differences in phenotypic plasticity: predator-induced changes in wood frog tadpoles. Ecol. Monogr. 72: 77-93.
36. Relyea, R.A. 2003. How prey respond to combined predators: a review and an empirical test. Ecology 84: 1827-1839.
37. Relyea, R.A. 2007. Getting out alive: how predators affect the decision to metamorphose. Oecologia 152: 389-400.
38. Relyea, R.A. & Auld, J.R. 2004. Having the guts to compete: how intestinal plasticity explains costs of inducible defences. Ecol. Lett. 7: 869-875.
39. Richter-Boix, A., Teplitsky, C., Rogell, B. & Laurila, A. 2010. Local selection modifies phenotypic divergence among Rana temporaria populations in the presence of gene flow. Mol. Ecol. 19: 716-731.
40. Scheiner, S.M. & Berrigan, D. 1998. The genetics of phenotypic plasticity. VIII. The cost of plasticity in Daphnia pulex. Evolution 52: 368-378.
41. Schoeppner, N.M. & Relyea, R.A. 2005. Damage, digestion, and defence: the roles of alarm cues and kairomones for inducing prey defences. Ecol. Lett. 8: 505-512.
42. Semlitsch, R.D. 1990. Effects of body size, sibship, and tail injury on the susceptibility of tadpoles to dragonfly predation. Can. J. Zool. 68: 127-130.
43. Semlitsch, R.D., Scott, D.C. & Pechmann, J.H.K. 1988. Time and size at metamorphosis related to adult fitness in Ambystoma talpoideum. Ecology 69: 184-192.
44. Slos, S. & Stoks, R. 2008. Predation risk induces stress proteins and reduces antioxidant defense. Funct. Ecol. 22: 637-642.
45. Smith, D.C. 1987. Adult recruitment in chorus frogs: effects of size and date at metamorphosis. Ecology 68: 344-350.
46. Steiner, U.K. 2007. Linking antipredator behaviour, ingestion, gut evacuation and costs of predator-induced responses in tadpoles. Anim. Behav. 74: 1473-1479.
47. Stoks, R., McPeek, M.A. & Mitchell, J.L. 2003. Evolution of prey behavior in response to changes in predation regime: damselflies in fish and dragonfly lakes. Evolution 57: 574-585.
48. Takahara, T., Kohmatsu, Y., Maruyama, A. & Yamaoka, R. 2008. Benefit of suites of defensive behavior induced by predator chemical cues on anuran tadpoles, Hyla japonica. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 63: 235-240.
49. Teplitsky, C., Plénet, S. & Joly, P. 2004. Hierarchical responses of tadpoles to multiple predators. Ecology 85: 2888-2894.
50. Teplitsky, C., Plénet, S., Léna, J.P., Mermet, N., Malet, E. & Joly, P. 2005. Escape behaviour and ultimate causes of specific induced defences in an anuran tadpole. J. Evol. Biol. 18: 180-190.
51. Tollrian, R. 1993. Neckteeth formation in Daphnia pulex as an example of continuous plasticity: morphological effects of Chaoborus kairomones concentration and their quantification. J. Plankton Res. 15: 1309-1318.
52. Tollrian, R. & Harvell, C.D. 1999. The Ecology and Evolution of Inducible Defences. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
53. Travis, J., Keen, W.H. & Julianna, J. 1985. The role of relative body size in a predator-prey relationship between dragonfly naiads and larval anurans. Oikos 45: 59-65.
54. Turner, A.M. & Montgomery, S.L. 2003. Spatial and temporal scales of predator avoidance: experiments with fish and snails. Ecology 84: 616-622.
55. Turner, A.M., Turner, S.S. & Lappi, H.M. 2006. Learning, memory and predator avoidance by freshwater snails: effects of experience on predator recognition. Anim. Behav. 72: 1443-1450.
56. Urban, M.C. 2007a. The growth-predation risk trade-off under a growing gape-limited predation threat. Ecology 88: 2587-2597.
57. Urban, M.C. 2007b. Risky prey behavior evolves in risky habitats. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104: 14377-14382.
58. Van Buskirk, J. 2000. The costs of an inducible defense in anuran larvae. Ecology 81: 2813-2821.
59. Van Buskirk, J. 2001. Specific induced responses to different predator species in anuran larvae. J. Evol. Biol. 14: 482-489.
60. Van Buskirk, J. & Arioli, M. 2002. Dosage response of an induced defense: how sensitive are tadpoles to predation risk? Ecology 83: 1580-1585.
61. Van Buskirk, J. & Relyea, R.A. 1998. Selection for phenotypic plasticity in Rana sylvatica tadpoles. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 65: 301-328.
62. Van Buskirk, J. & Saxer, G. 2001. Delayed costs of an induced defense in tadpoles? Morphology, hopping, and development rate at metamorphosis Evolution 55: 821-829.
63. Van Buskirk, J. & Yurewicz, K.L. 1998. Effects of predators on prey growth rate: relative contributions of thinning and reduced activity. Oikos 82: 20-28.
64. Van Buskirk, J., McCollum, S.A. & Werner, E.E. 1997. Natural selection for environmentally induced phenotypes in tadpoles. Evolution 51: 1983-1992.
65. Werner, E.E. 1986. Amphibian metamorphosis: growth rate, predation risk, and the optimal size at transformation. Am. Nat. 128: 319-341.
66. Werner, E.E. & Anholt, B.R. 1993. Ecological consequences of the trade-off between growth and mortality rates mediated by foraging activity. Am. Nat. 1412: 242-272.