Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 47–58 | Cite as

Threat-sensitive predator avoidance in damselfish-trumpetfish interactions

  • G. S. Helfman


Predatory threat can vary during a predator-prey interaction as an attack escalates or among predators at different times. A Threat-sensitivity hypothesis is presented which predicts that prey individuals will trade-off predator avoidance against other activities by altering their avoidance responses in a manner that reflects the magnitude of the predatory threat. This hypothesis was tested in the field by presenting prey (threespot damselfish, Stegastes planifrons) with models of foraging predators (Atlantic trumpetfish, Aulostomus maculatus). During a presentation, damselfish displayed progressively stronger avoidance as predator models were brought nearer; response waned rapidly once predator models passed overhead. Larger predator models and those oriented in a strike pose evoked stronger avoidance reactions than smaller and non-attacking models, intermediate responses were evoked by size and orientation combinations that were intermediate in threat, and habituation was more common to weakly-threatening presentations. Smaller damselfish showed stronger avoidance of models than did larger damselfish. Nonavoidance activities, such as feeding and territorial defense, were curtailed during presentations or were more common during weakly threatening presentations. Approaches to the models, equated with mobbing, were more common among large damselfish, again reflecting degrees of vulnerability among different size prey individuals. These initial results indicate that damselfish threatened by predators respond in a graded manner that reflects the degree of threat posed by the predator, in accordance with the Threat-sensitivity hypothesis.


Initial Result Avoidance Response Size Prey Predator Avoidance Territorial Defense 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aronson RB (1983) Foraging behavior of the west Atlantic trumpetfish, Aulostomus maculatus: use of large, herbivorous reef fishes as camouflage. Bull Mar Sci 33:166–171Google Scholar
  2. Caraco T, Martindale S, Whittam TS (1980) An empirical demonstration of risk-sensitive foraging preferences. Anim Behav 28:820–830Google Scholar
  3. Cerri RD, Fraser DF (1983) Predation and risk in foraging minnows: balancing conflicting demands. Am Nat 121:552–561Google Scholar
  4. Conover WJ (1980) Practical nonparametric statistics, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Curio E (1976) The ethology of predation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Curio E (1978) The adaptive significance of avian mobbing. I. Teleonomic hypotheses and predictions. Z Tierpsychol 48:175–183Google Scholar
  7. Davies NB, Houston AI (1984) Territory economics. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology, 2nd edn. Sinauer Sunderland, pp 148–169Google Scholar
  8. Dill LM (1987) Animal decision making and its ecological consequences: the future of aquatic ecology and behaviour. Can J Zool 65:803–811Google Scholar
  9. Dill LM, Fraser AHG (1984) Risk of predation and the feeding behavior of juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 16:65–71Google Scholar
  10. Donaldson TJ (1984) Mobbing behavior by Stegastes albifasciatus (Pomacentridae), a territorial mosaic damselfish. Japan J Ichthyol 31:345–348Google Scholar
  11. Ebersole JP (1977) The adaptive significance of interspecific territoriality in the reef fish Eupomacentrus leucostictus. Ecology 58:914–920Google Scholar
  12. Edmunds M (1974) Defence in animals. Longman, EssexGoogle Scholar
  13. Eibl-Eibesfeldt I (1955) Über Symbiosen, Parasitismus und andere besondere zwischenartliche Beziehungen tropischer Meeresfische. Z Tierpsychol 12:203–219Google Scholar
  14. FitzGerald GJ, van Havre N (1985) Flight, fright and shoaling in sticklebacks (Gasterosteidae). Biol Behav 10:321–331Google Scholar
  15. Fraser DF, Huntingford FA (1986) Feeding and avoiding predation hazard: the behavioral response of the prey. Ethology 73:56–68Google Scholar
  16. Gilliam JF, Fraser DF (1987) Habitat selection under predation hazard: test of a model with foraging minnows. Ecology 68:1856–1862Google Scholar
  17. Godin J-GJ, Smith SA (1988) A fitness cost of foraging in the guppy. Nature (London) 333:69–71Google Scholar
  18. Harvey C, Garneau F-X, Himmelman JH (1987) Chemodetection of the predatory seastar Leptasterias polaris by the whelk Buccinum undatum. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 40:79–86Google Scholar
  19. Helfman GS (1983) Resin-coated fishes: a simple model technique for in situ studies of fish behavior. Copeia 1986:547–549Google Scholar
  20. Helfman GS (1986) Behavioral responses of prey fishes during predator-prey interactions. In: Feder ME, Lauder GV (eds) Predator-prey relationships. University Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 135–156Google Scholar
  21. Helfman GS, Clark JB (1986) Rotational feeding: overcoming gape-limited foraging in anguillid eels. Copeia 1986:679–685Google Scholar
  22. Holbrook SJ, Schmitt RJ (1988) Effects of predation risk on foraging behavior: mechanisms altering patch choice. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 121:151–163Google Scholar
  23. Ishihara M (1987) Effect of mobbing toward predators by the damselfish Pomacentrus coelestis (Pisces: Pomacentridae). J Ethol 5:43–52Google Scholar
  24. Jaeger RG, Nishikawa KCB, Barnard DE (1983) Foraging tactics of a terrestrial salamander: costs of territorial defence. Anim Behav 31:191–198Google Scholar
  25. Karplus I, Goren M, Algom D (1982) A preliminary experimental analysis of predator face recognition by Chromis caeruleus (Pisces, Pomacentridae). Z Tierpsychol 58:53–65Google Scholar
  26. Kaufman L (1976) Feeding behavior and functional coloration of the Atlantic trumpetfish, Aulostomus maculatus. Copeia 1976:377–378Google Scholar
  27. Krebs JR, Dawkins R (1984) Animal signals: mind-reading and manipulation. In: Krebs JR, Davies NB (eds) Behavioural ecology and evolutionary approach, 2nd edn. Sinauer, Sunderland, pp 380–402Google Scholar
  28. Lima SL, Valone TJ, Caraco T (1985) Foraging-efficiency-predation-risk trade-off in the grey squirrel. Anim Behav 33:155–165Google Scholar
  29. Lucas JR (1987) Foraging time contraints and diet choice. In: Kamil AC, Krebs JR, Pulliam HR (eds) Foraging behavior. Plenum Press, New York, pp 239–269Google Scholar
  30. Magurran AE (1986) Predator inspection behaviour in minnow shoals: differences between populations and individuals. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 19:267–273Google Scholar
  31. Magurran AE, Girling SL (1986) Predator model recognition and response habituation in shoaling minnows. Anim Behav 34:510–518Google Scholar
  32. Magurran AE, Pitcher TJ (1987) Provenance, shoal size and the sociobiology of predator-evasion behavior in minnow shoals. Proc R Soc London B 229:439–465Google Scholar
  33. Martindale S (1982) Nest defense and central place foraging: a model and experiment. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 10:85–89Google Scholar
  34. Milinski, M (1986) Constraints placed by predators on feeding behavior. In: Pitcher TJ (ed) The behaviour of teleost fishes. Croom Helm, London, pp 236–252Google Scholar
  35. Milinski M, Heller R (1978) Influence of a predator on the optimal foraging behaviour of sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.). Nature (London) 275:642–644Google Scholar
  36. Pitcher TJ, Green D, Magurran AE (1986) Dicing with death: predator inspection behaviour in minnow shoals. J Fish Biol 28:439–448Google Scholar
  37. Power ME (1987) Predator avoidance by grazing fishes in temperate and tropical streams: importance of stream depth and prey size. In: Kerfoot WC, Sih A (eds) Predation direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities. University Press New England, Hanover, pp 333–351Google Scholar
  38. Randall JE (1967) Food habits of reef fishes of the West Indies. Stud Trop Oceanogr Miami 5:665–847Google Scholar
  39. Robertson DR, Sweatman HPA, Fletcher EA, Cleland MG (1976) Schooling as a mechanism for circumventing the territoriality of competitors. Ecology 57:1208–1220Google Scholar
  40. Robertson DR, Hoffman SG, Sheldon JM (1981) Availability of space for the territorial Caribbean damselfish Eupomacentrus planifrons. Ecology 62:1162–1170Google Scholar
  41. Sih A (1980) Optimal behavior: can foragers balance two conflicting demands? Science 210:1041–1043Google Scholar
  42. Sih A (1982) Foraging strategies and the avoidance of predation by an aquatic insect, Notonecta hoffmanni. Ecology 63:786–796Google Scholar
  43. Sih A (1987) Predators and prey lifestyles: an evolutionary and ecological overview. In: Kerfoot WC, Sih A (eds) Predation direct and indirect impacts on aquatic communities. University Press New England, Hanover, pp 203–224Google Scholar
  44. Stein RA, Magnuson JJ (1976) Behavioral response of crayfish to a fish predator. Ecology 57:751–761Google Scholar
  45. Thresher RE (1976) Field analysis of the territoriality of the threespot damselfish, Eupomacentrus planifrons (Pomacentridae). Copeia 1976:266–276Google Scholar
  46. Werner EE, Gilliam JF (1984) The ontogenetic niche and species interactions in size-structured populations. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 15:393–425Google Scholar
  47. Werner EE, Gilliam JF, Hall DJ, Mittelbach GG (1983) An experimental test of the effect of predation risk on habitat use in fish. Ecology 64:1540–1548Google Scholar
  48. Williams AH (1980) The threespot damselfish: a noncarnivorous keystone species. Am Nat 116:138–142Google Scholar
  49. Woodland DJ, Jaafar Z, Knight M-L (1980) The “pursuit deterrent” function of alarm signals. Am Nat 115:748–753Google Scholar
  50. Ydenberg RC, Dill LM (1986) The economics of fleeing from predators. Adv Stud Behav 16:229–249Google Scholar
  51. Zar JHG (1974) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  52. Zaret TM, Suffern JS (1976) Vertical migration in zooplankton as a predator avoidance mechanism. Limnol Oceanogr 21:804–813Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. S. Helfman
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Institute of EcologyUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations