Ontogenetic differences in chemical alarm cue production determine antipredator responses and learned predator recognition
- 296 Downloads
How individuals assess, respond and subsequently learn from alarm cues is crucial to their survival and future fitness. Yet this information is not constant through time; many individuals are exposed to different predators throughout their life as they outgrow some predators or move to habitats containing different predators. To maximise overall fitness, individuals should discriminate between different cues and respond and learn from only those that are relevant to their current ontogenetic stage. We tested whether juvenile spiny chromis, Acanthochromis polyacanthus, could distinguish between chemical alarm cues from conspecific donors of different ontogenetic stages and whether the cue ontogenetic stage of the cue donor affected the efficacy of learning about predators. Juveniles displayed a significant antipredator response when conditioned with juvenile chemical alarm cues paired with predator odour but failed to respond when conditioned with predator odour paired with either adult alarm cues or with saltwater. Subsequently, individuals only recognised the predator odour alone as a threat when conditioned with juvenile alarm cues. This demonstrates that prey may be highly specific in how they use information from conspecific alarm cues, selectively responding to and learning from only those cues that are relevant to their developmental stage.
KeywordsPredator recognition Learning Ontogeny Threat sensitivity Coral reefs Fish
We would like to thank the staff at the JCU MARFU aquarium facility for their assistance and Christopher Goatley for providing comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. Funding was provided by the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies (MIM).
This research complies with current laws of Australia and was undertaken with approval of the James Cook University animal ethics committee (permit: A1067) and according to the University’s animal ethics guidelines.
- Brown GE, Foam PE, Cowell HE, Fiore PG, Chivers DP (2004) Production of chemical alarm cues in convict cichlids: the effects of diet, body condition and ontogeny. Ann Zool Fenn 41:487–499Google Scholar
- Chivers DP, Smith RJF (1998) Chemical alarm signalling in aquatic predator-prey systems: a review and prospectus. Ecoscience 5:338–352Google Scholar
- Golub JL, Brown GE (2003) Are all signals the same? Ontogenetic change in the response to conspecific and heterospecific chemical alarm signals by juvenile green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 54:113–118Google Scholar
- Nonacs P, Blumstein DT (2010) Predation risk and behavioural life history. In: Westneat DF, Fox CW (eds) Evolutionary behavioural ecology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 207–224Google Scholar