Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Subhabitat selection by foraging threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus): previous experience and social conformity

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Any mechanism that allows animals to increase their foraging efficiency is likely to be selected for, including the ability to learn to recognise and subsequently discriminate between habitat types based on their profitability. In a series of laboratory studies, we manipulated prey densities across two different experimental subhabitats and demonstrated that threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) can develop foraging preferences for subhabitats that have previously yielded prey. Fish were not recalling the spatial location of prey patches; rather, they were discriminating between subhabitats based on foraging experience there and allocating foraging effort accordingly. Foraging preferences took around 14 days to develop, and once established, they persisted independently of experimental prey density, suggesting that fish were using experience rather than real-time sampling to select foraging grounds. When we presented focal fish with social information cues, we found that they preferentially used local enhancement and current public information cues when they conflicted with previous experience, but that they did not use prior public information. This suggests that in the presence of conspecifics, individuals prioritise social conformity over the use of private information. We discuss our results in the context of optimal foraging and the trade-offs associated with balancing conflicting private and social information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Auster PJ, Malatesta RJ, Donaldson CLS (1997) Distributional responses to small-scale habitat variability by early juvenile silver hake, Merluccius bilinearis. Environ Biol Fisches 50(2):195–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auster PJ, Lindholm J, Schaub S, Funnell G, Kaufman LS, Valentine PC (2003) Use of sand wave habitats by silver hake. J Fish Biol 62(1):143–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyero L, Bosch J (2004) The effect of riffle-scale environmental variability on macroinvertebrate assemblages in a tropical stream. Hydrobiologia 524(1):125–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown C, Laland KN (2002) Social learning of a novel avoidance task in the guppy: conformity and social release. Anim Behav 64(2):41–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnov EL (1976) Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theor Popul Biol 9:129–136

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Coolen I, van Bergen Y, Day RL, Laland KN (2003) Heterospecific use of public information by fish in a foraging context. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 270(1531):2413–2419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coolen I, Ward AJW, Hart PJB, Laland KN (2005) Foraging nine-spined sticklebacks prefer to rely on public information over simpler social cues. Behav Ecol 16(5):865–870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dall SRX, Giraldeau LA, Olsson O, McNamara JM, Stephens DW (2005) Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 20(4):187–193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Danchin E, Giraldeau LA, Valone TJ, Wagner RH (2004) Public information: from nosy neighbours to cultural evolution. Science 305:487–491

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Day RL, MacDonald T, Brown C, Laland KN, Reader SM (2001) Interactions between shoal size and conformity in guppy social foraging. Anim Behav 62:917–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis T, Hughes RN, Howell BR (2002) Artificial dietary regime may impair subsequent foraging behaviour of hatchery-reared turbot released into the natural environment. J Fish Biol 61(1):252–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank AH, Flood NB, Overmier JB (1972) Reversal-learning in forebrain ablated and olfactory tract sectioned teleost, Carassius auratus. Psychon Sci 26(3):149–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Fretwell S, Lucas HL (1970) On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheor 19:16–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giraldeau L-A, Valone TJ, Templeton JJ (2002) Potential disadvantages of using socially acquired information. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 357:1559–1566

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Girvan JR, Braithwaite VA (1998) Population differences in spatial learning in three-spined sticklebacks. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 265(1399):913–918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotceitas V, Colgan P (1991) Assessment of patch profitability and ideal free distribution: the significance of sampling. Behaviour 119:65–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart PJB (2003) Habitat use and feeding behaviour in two closely related fish species, the three-spined and nine-spined stickleback: an experimental analysis. J Anim Ecol 72:777–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoare DJ, Ruxton GD, Godin JJ, Krause J (2000) The social organisation of free-ranging fish shoals. Oikos 89:546–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes RN, Blight CM (1999) Algorithmic behaviour and spatial memory are used by two intertidal fish species to solve the radial maze. Anim Behav 58:601–613

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal RL, Coolen I, Laland KN (2004) The role of conformity in foraging when personal and social information conflict. Behav Ecol 15(2):269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal RL, Coolen I, van Bergen Y, Laland KN (2006) Trade offs in the adaptive use of social and asocial learning. Adv Stud Behav (in press)

  • Krause J (1993) The influence of hunger on shoal size choice by three-spined sticklebacks, Gasterosteus aculeatus. J Fish Biol 43:775–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lachlan RF, Crooks L, Laland KN (1998) Who follows whom? Shoaling preferences and social learning of foraging information in guppies. Anim Behav 56:181–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laland KN (2004) Social learning strategies. Learn Behav 32(1):4–14

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laland KN, Williams K (1997) Shoaling generates social learning of foraging information in guppies. Anim Behav 53:1161–1169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Langley R (1979) Practical statistics simply explained. Pan Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin LE, Vergara E (1987) Reversal learning in groups of the schooling fish Aphyocharax erithrurus on an avoidance paddle. J Comp Psychol 101(4):317–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackney PA, Hughes RN (1995) Foraging behaviour and memory window in sticklebacks. Behaviour 132:1241–1253

    Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, Seghers BH (1990) Population differences in the schooling behaviour of newborn guppies, Poecilia reticulata. Ethology 84(4):334–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magurran AE, Seghers BH (1994) Predator inspection behaviour covaries with schooling tendency amongst wild guppy, Poecilia reticulata, populations in Trinidad. Behaviour 128:121–134

    Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M (1994) Long-term memory for food patches and implications for ideal free distributions in sticklebacks. Ecology 75(4):1150–1156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M, Parker GA (1991) Competition for resources. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Blackwell, Cambridge, pp 137–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Odling-Smee L, Braithwaite VA (2003) The role of learning in fish orientation. Fish Fish 4(3):235–246

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitcher TJ, Magurran AE (1983) Shoal size, patch profitability and information exchange in foraging goldfish. Anim Behav 31:546–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitcher TJ, Magurran AE, Winfield IJ (1982) Fish in larger shoals find food faster. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 10(2):149–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryer CH, Olla BL (1995) Influences of food distribution on fish foraging behaviour. Anim Behav 49(2):411–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seghers BH, Magurran AE (1995) Population differences in the schooling behaviour of the Trinidadian guppy, Poecilia reticulata—adaptation or constraint. Can J Zool 73(6):1100–1105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steingrund P, Fernö A (1997) Feeding behaviour of reared and wild cod and the effect of learning: two strategies of feeding on the two-spotted goby. J Fish Biol 51(2):334–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens DW, Krebs JR (1986) Foraging theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Taniguchi H, Tokeshi M (2004) Effects of habitat complexity on benthic assemblages in a variable environment. Freshw Biol 49(9):1164–1178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taniguchi H, Nakano S, Tokeshi M (2003) Influences of habitat complexity on the diversity and abundance of epiphytic invertebrates on plants. Freshw Biol 48(4):718–728

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valone TJ, Templeton JJ (2002) Public information for the assessment of quality: a widespread social phenomenon. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 357:1549–1557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Bergen Y, Coolen I, Laland KN (2004) Nine-spined sticklebacks exploit the most reliable source when public and private information conflict. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 271(1542):957–962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warburton K (2003) Learning of foraging skills by fish. Fish Fish 4(3):203–215

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(6):925–929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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(6):575–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster MM, Hart PJB (2004) Substrate discrimination and preference in foraging fish. Anim Behav 68:1071–1077

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Work was carried out at the Department of Biology, University of Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK. We gratefully thank I. Coolen, T.J. Pitcher, A.J.W. Ward and two anonymous referees for helpful criticism of this manuscript. M.M. Webster was supported by a NERC studentship. P.J.B. Hart was supported by NERC grant NER/A/S/2001/01208. The experimental procedures detailed here comply with the current laws of the United Kingdom.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK

    Michael M. Webster & Paul J. B. Hart

Authors
  1. Michael M. Webster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul J. B. Hart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael M. Webster.

Additional information

Communicated by J. Krause

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Webster, M.M., Hart, P.J.B. Subhabitat selection by foraging threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus): previous experience and social conformity. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 60, 77–86 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-005-0143-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-005-0143-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation