Antipredator Behavior of American Bullfrogs (Lithobates catesbeianus) in a Novel Environment

Ethology

Volumn 118, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 867-875

  Garcia, Tiffany S ^a   Thurman, Lindsey L ^a   Rowe, Jennifer C ^a   Selego, Stephen M ^a  

^a OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIPREDATOR DEFENSE; AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT; CHEMICAL CUE; COEXISTENCE; DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE; DIET; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; FROG; INVASIVE SPECIES; LIFE HISTORY TRAIT; PREDATION RISK; REFUGE; SALMONID; SYMPATRY;

AMPHIBIA; LITHOBATES; MICROPTERUS; MICROPTERUS SALMOIDES; ONCORHYNCHUS MYKISS; RANA CATESBEIANA;

EID: 84864291163     PISSN: 01791613     EISSN: 14390310     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2012.02074.x     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Blumstein, D. T. 2006: The multipredator hypothesis and the evolutionary persistence of antipredator behavior. Ethology 112, 209-217.
2. Carmichael, R. 1983: Feeding ecology and aspect of the biology of largemouth bass, rainbow trout, brown trout, and relict dace and the dietary overlap of largemouth bass and rainbow trout with canvasback and redhead ducks at Ruby Marsh, Nevada. M.S. Thesis, Oregon State University, Oregon, USA.
3. 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.
4. Epp, K. J. & Gabor, C. R. 2008: Innate and learned predator recognition mediated by chemical signals in Eurycea nana. Ethology 114, 607-615.
5. Ferrari, M. C. O. & Chivers, D. P. 2006: Learning threat-sensitive predator avoidance: how do fathead minnows incorporate conflicting information? Anim. Behav. 71, 1295-1298.
6. Ferrari, M. C. O. & Chivers, D. P. 2009a: Latent inhibition of predator recognition by embryonic amphibians. Biol. Lett. 2009, 160-162.
7. Ferrari, M. C. O. & Chivers, D. P. 2009b: Temporal variability, threat sensitivity and conflicting information about the nature of risk: understanding the dynamics of tadpole antipredator behavior. Anim. Behav. 78, 11-16.
8. Ferrari, M. C. O., Messier, F. & Chivers, D. P. 2008: Can prey exhibit threat-sensitive generalization of predator recognition? Extending the predator recognition continuum hypothesis. Proc. Biol. Sci. 275, 1811-1816.
9. Ferrari, M. C. O., Brown, G. E., Messier, F. & Chivers, D. P. 2009: Threat-sensitive generalization of predator recognition by larval amphibians. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 63, 1369-1375.
10. Funk, W. C., Garcia, T. S., Cortina, G. A. & Hill, R. H. 2010: Population genetics of introduced bullfrogs, Rana (Lithobates) catesbeianus, in the Willamette Valley, Oregon, U.S.A. Biol. Invasions 13, 651-658.
11. Gahl, M. K., Calhoun, A. J. K. & Graves, R. 2009: Facultative use of seasonal pools by American bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana). Wetlands 29, 697-703.
12. Garcia, T. S., Staci, J. & Sih, A. 2004: Larval salamander response to UV radiation and predation risk: color change and microhabitat choice. Ecol. Appl. 14, 1055-1064.
13. Ghalambor, C. K., McKay, J. K., Carrol, S. P. & Reznick, D. N. 2007: Adaptive versus non-adaptive phenotypic plasticity and the potential for contemporary adaptation in new environments. Funct. Ecol. 21, 394-407.
14. Gherardi, F., Mavuti, K. M., Pacini, N., Triciarico, E. & Harper, D. M. 2011: The smell of danger: chemical recognition of Fish predators by the invasive crayfish Procambarus clarkii. Freshw. Biol. 56, 1567-1578.
15. Gonzalo, A., Lopez, P. & Martin, J. 2009: Learning, memorizing and apparent forgetting of chemical cues from new predators by Iberian green frog tadpoles. Anim. Cogn. 12, 745-750.
16. Gosner, K. L. 1960: A simplified table for staging anuran embryos and larvae with notes on identification. Copeia 1960, 183-190.
17. Hallgrimsson, B. & Hall, B. K. 2011: Epigenetics: linking genotype and phenotype in development and evolution. University of California Press, California.
18. Hayes, M. P. & Jennings, M. R. 1986: Decling of ranid frog species in North America: are Bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana) responsible? J. Herpetol. 20, 490-509.
19. Helfman, G. S. 1989: Threat-sensitive predator avoidance in damselfish-trumpetfish interactions. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. (Print) 24, 47-58.
20. Hodgson, J. R. & Hansen, E. M. 2005: Terrestrial prey items in the diet of largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides, in a small north temperate lake. J. Freshw. Ecol. 20, 793-794.
21. Hodgson, J. R., Hodgson, C. J. & Brooks, S. M. 1991: Trophic interactions and competition between largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and rainbow trout (Oncorhychus mykiss) in a manipulated lake. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 48, 1704-1712.
22. Kats, L. B. & Dill, L. M. 1998: The scent of death: chemo-sensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. Ecoscience 5, 361-394.
23. Kats, L. B., Petranka, J. W. & Sih, A. 1988: Antipredator defences and the persistence of amphibian larvae with fishes. Ecology 69, 1865-1870.
24. Kesavaraju, B., Damal, K. & Juliano, S. A. 2007: Threat-sensitive behavioural responses to concentrations of water-borne cues from predation. Ethology 113, 199-206.
25. Kiesecker, J. M. & Blaustein, A. R. 1997: Population differences in responses of Red-legged Frogs (Rana aurora) to introduced bullfrogs. Ecology 78, 1752-1760.
26. Kiesecker, J. M. & Blaustein, A. R. 1998: Effects of introduced bullfrogs and smallmouth bass on microhabitat use, growth, and survival of native Red-Legged Frogs (Rana aurora). Conserv. Biol. 12, 776-787.
27. Kishida, O., Trussel, G. C. & Nishimura, K. 2007: Geographic variation in a predator-induced defense and its genetic basis. Ecology 88, 1948-1954.
28. Kruse, K. C. & Francis, M. G. 1977: A predation deterrent in larvae of the bullfrog, Rana catesbeiana. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 106, 248-252.
29. Laurila, A., Kujasalo, J. & Ranta, E. 1997: Different anti-predator behaviour in two anuran tadpoles: effects of predator diet. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 40, 329-336.
30. Li, Y., Ke, Z., Wang, S., Smith, G. R. & Liu, X. 2011: An exotic species is the favourite prey of a native enemy. PLoS One 6, e24299.
31. Lima, S. L. & Dill, L. M. 1989: Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation: a review and prospectus. Can. J. Zool. 68, 619-640.
32. Mandrillon, A. L. & Saglio, P. 2009: Effects of single and combined embryonic exposures to herbicide and conspecific chemical alarm cues on hatching and larval traits in the common frog (Rana temporaria). Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 56, 566-576.
33. Mathis, A. & Smith, R. J. F. 1993: Chemical labeling of northern pike (Esox lucius) by the alarm pheromone of fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas). J. Chem. Ecol. 19, 1967-1979.
34. Paoletti, D. J., Olson, D. H. & Blaustein, A. R. 2011: Responses of foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana Boylii) larvae to an introduced predator. Copeia 2011, 161-168.
35. Payne, C. M., Tillberg, C. V. & Suarez, A. V. 2004: Recognition systems and biological invasions. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 41, 843-858.
36. Pearl, C. A., Adams, M. J., Schuytema, G. S. & Nebeker, A. V. 2003: Behavioral responses of anuran larvae to chemical cues of native and introduced predators in the Pacific Northwestern Unites States. J. Herpetol. 37, 572-576.
37. Pearl, C. A., Adams, M. J., Bury, R. B. & McCreary, B. 2004: Asymmetrical effects of introduced bullfrogs (Rana catesbeiana) on native radid frogs in Oregon. Copeia 2004, 11-20.
38. Petranka, J. W., Kats, L. B. & Sih, A. 1987: Predator-prey interactions among fish and larval amphibians: use of chemical cues to detect predatory fish. Anim. Behav. 35, 420-425.
39. Semlitsch, R. D. & Reyer, H. U. 1992: Modification of anti-predator behavior in tadpoles by environmental conditioning. J. Anim. Ecol. 61, 353-360.
40. Shrader, T. & Moody, B. 1997: Predation and competition between largemouth bass and rainbow trout in Crane Prairie Reservoir. Oregon. Oregon Information Reports, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 24 p.
41. Skelly, D. K. 1992: Field evidence for a cost of behavioral antipredator response in a larval amphibian. Ecology 73, 704-708.
42. Smith, G. R., Burgett, A. A., Temple, K. G., Sparks, K. A. & Winter, K. E. 2008a: The ability of three species of tadpoles to differentiate among potential fish predators. Ethology 114, 701-710.
43. Smith, G. R., Boyd, A., Dayer, C. B. & Winter, K. E. 2008b: Behavioral responses of American toad and bullfrog tadpoles to the presence of cues from the invasive fish, Gambusia affinis. Biol. Invasions 10, 743-748.
44. Teplitsky, C., Plénet, S. & Joly, P. 2003: Tadpoles' responses to risk of fish introduction. Oecologia 134, 270-277.
45. Verhoeven, K. J. F., Biere, A., Harvey, J. A. & Van Der Putten, W. H. 2009: Plant invaders and their novel natural enemies: who is naive? Ecol. Lett. 12, 107-117.
46. Welborn, G. A., Skelly, D. K. & Werner, E. E. 1996: Mechanisms creating community structure across a freshwater habitat gradient. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27, 337-363.