Skip to main content
Log in

Optimal foraging: The influence of intraspecific competition on diet selection

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

Summary

Three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) showed a relative preference for a familiar prey size when hunting for two sizes of Daphnia magna in high density. This result is not compatible with the ‘apparent size’ hypothesis. Ten groups were investigated, each consisting of two stickle-backs tested under three consecutive experimental conditions, to establish whether the function of the preference for a familiar prey size could be avoidance of competition.

First, the relative competitive ability of each fish was determined by the proportion it consumed of three series of 60 medium-sized daphnia, offered pairwise. Second, during the consumption of five series of 30 pairs, each consisting of a large and a small daphnia, it was determined how many items each fish caught of each prey size. As handling times were equal for both prey types, the larger prey size was more profitable. There was a significant correlation between relative competitive ability and mean proportion of large daphnia in the diet. In the last series the less successful competitiors caught a higher proportion of small prey than in the first series. Finally, each fish was given the choice between large and small daphnia in the absence of its competitor. The sticklebacks chose a diet similar to the one they had been allowed to select previously with competition. The previously more successful competitors concentrated on large daphnia, whereas the poorer competitors fed as generalists but not unselectively.

The fish probably learned the distance from which they had recently attacked familiar prey successfully. This ‘sure attack’ distance depends on the fish's competitive ability.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barnard CJ, Brown CAJ (1981) Prey size selection and competition in the common shrew (Sorex araneus L.). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8:239–243

    Google Scholar 

  • Beukerna JJ (1968) Predation by the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.): The influence of hunger and experience. Behaviour 31:1–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Coates D (1980) Prey-size intake in humbug damselfish, Dascyllus aruanus (Pisces, Pomacentridae) living within social groups. J Anim Ecol 49:335–340

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1976) The ethology of predation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eggers DM (1982) Planktivore preference by prey size. Ecology 63:381–390

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner MB (1981) Mechanisms of size selectivity by planktivorous fish: A test of hypotheses. Ecology 62:571–578

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson RM (1980) Optimal prey size selection by three-spined sticklebacks (Gasteuosteus aculeatus): A test of the apparent size hypothesis. Z Tierpsychol 52:291–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Godin JGJ (1978) Behavior of juvenile pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha Walbaum) toward novel prey: Influence of ontogeny and experience. Environ Biol Fishes 3:261–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman MI, Greengard H, Ivy AC (1943) The effect of dietary composition on pancreatic enzymes. Am J Physiol 138:676–682

    Google Scholar 

  • Janetos AC, Cole BJ (1981) Imperfectly optimal animals. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 9:203–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacelnik A, Houston AI, Krebs JR (1981) Optimal foraging and territorial defence in the great tit (Parus major). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8:35–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Kislalioglu M, Gibson RN (1976) Prey “handling time” and its importance in food selection by the 15-spined stickle-back, Spinachia spinachia (L.). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 25:151–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs JR (1973) Behavioral aspects of predation. In: Bateson PPG, Klopfer PH (eds) Perspectives in ethology. Plenum Press, New York London, pp 73–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs JR (1978) Optimal foraging: Decision rules for predatiors. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology: An evolutionary approach. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 23–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs JR (1980) Optimal foraging, predation risk and territory defense. Ardea 68:83–90

    Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Pianka ER (1966) On optimal use of a patchy environment. Am Nat 100:603–609

    Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M (1977) Do all members of a swarm suffer the same predation? Z Tierpsychol 45:373–388

    Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M, Heller R (1978) Influence of a predator on the optimal foraging behaviour of sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.). Nature 275:642–644

    Google Scholar 

  • Milinski M, Löwenstein C (1980) On predator selection against abnormalities of movement. A test of a hypothesis. Z Tierpsychol 53:325–340

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Brien WJ (1979) The predator-prey interaction of planktivorous fish and zooplankton. Am Sci 67:573–581

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Brien WJ, Slade NA, Vinyard GL (1976) Apparent size as the determinant of prey selection by bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus). Ecology 57:1304–1310

    Google Scholar 

  • Partridge L (1981) Increased preferences for familiar foods in small mammals. Anim Behav 29:211–216

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein DI (1981) Individual variation and competition in the everglades pygmy sunfish. J Anim Ecol 50:337–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs L (1978) Angewandte Statistik. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sih A (1980) Optimal behavior: Can foragers balance two conflicting demands? Science 210:1041–1043

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1969) Biometry. Freeman, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinyard GL (1980) Differential prey vulnerability and predator selectivity: Effects of evasive prey on bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) and pumkinseed (L. gibbosus) predation. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 37:2294–2299

    Google Scholar 

  • Ware DM (1971) Predation by rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri): The effect of experience. J Fish Res Board Can 28:1847–1852

    Google Scholar 

  • Zach R, Smith JNM (1981) Optimal foraging in wild birds? In: Kamil AC, Sargent TD (eds) Foraging behavior. Garland STPM Press, New York London, pp 95–109

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Milinski, M. Optimal foraging: The influence of intraspecific competition on diet selection. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 11, 109–115 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00300099

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00300099

Keywords

Navigation