Coral Reefs

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 369–374 | Cite as

Suspended sediment alters predator–prey interactions between two coral reef fishes

  • A. S. WengerEmail author
  • M. I. McCormick
  • I. M. McLeod
  • G. P. Jones


Sediment derived from agriculture and development increases water turbidity and threatens the health of inshore coral reefs. In this study, we examined whether suspended sediment could change predation patterns through a reduction in visual cues. We measured survivorship of newly settled Chromis atripectoralis exposed to Pseudochromis fuscus, a common predator of juvenile damselfishes, in aquaria with one of four turbidity levels. Increased turbidity led to a nonlinear response in predation patterns. Predator-induced mortality was ~50 % in the control and low turbidity level, but exhibited a substantial increase in the medium level. In the highest turbidity level, predation rates declined to the level seen in the control. These results suggest an imbalance in how the predator and prey cope with turbidity. A turbidity-induced change to the outcome of predator–prey interactions represents a major change to the fundamental processes that regulate fish assemblages.


Turbidity Sediment thresholds Damselfish Predation 



This study was completed in accordance with the JCU animal ethics board under permit number A1619. This study was funded by an Australian Coral Reef Society grant to ASW and Australian Research Council, Centre of Excellence funding to GPJ. We thank Geoff Endo for field assistance and the staff at Lizard Island Research Station (Australian Museum) for logistical support.


  1. Almany GR, Webster MS (2006) The predation gauntlet: early post-settlement mortality in reef fishes. Coral Reefs 25:19–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anthony KR, Hoegh-Guldberg O (2003) Kinetics of photoacclimation in corals. Oecologia 134:23–31PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bisson PA, Bilby RE (1982) Avoidance of suspended sediment by juvenile Coho salmon. N Am J Fish Manage 2:371–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brodie JE, Kroon FJ, Schaffelke B, Wolanski EC, Lewis SE, Devlin MJ, Bohnet IC, Bainbridge ZT, Waterhouse J, Davis AM (2012) Terrestrial pollutant runoff to the Great Barrier Reef: an update of issues, priorities and management responses. Mar Pollut Bull 65:81–100PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caley MJ, Carr MH, Hixon MA, Hughes TP, Jones GP, Menge BA (1996) Recruitment and the local dynamics of open marine populations. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 27:477–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cyrus DP, Blaber JM (1992) Turbidity and salinity in a tropical Northern Australian estuary and their influence on fish distribution. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 35:545–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. De Robertis A, Ryer CH, Veloza A, Brodeur RD (2003) Differential effects of turbidity on prey consumption of piscivorous and planktivorous fish. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:1517–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fabricius KE, De’ath G, Humphrey C, Zagorskis I, Schaffelke B (2012) Intra-annual variation in turbidity in response to terrestrial runoff on near-shore coral reefs of the Great Barrier Reef. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci. doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2012.03.010
  9. Feary DA, Almany GR, McCormick MI, Jones GP (2007) Habitat choice, recruitment and the response of coral reef fishes to coral degradation. Oecologia 152:727–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feeney WE, Lonnstedt OM, Bosiger Y, Martin J, Jones GP, Rowe RJ, McCormick MI (2012) High rate of prey consumption in a small predatory fish on coral reefs. Coral Reefs 31:909–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferrari MCO, Wisenden BD, Chivers DP (2010) Chemical ecology of predator–prey interactions in aquatic ecosystems: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 88:698–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fiksen Ø, Aksnes DL, Flyum MH, Giske J (2002) The influence of turbidity on growth and survival of fish larvae: a numerical analysis. Hydrobiologia 484:49–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goatley CHR, Bellwood DR (2009) Morphological structure in a reef fish assemblage. Coral Reefs 28:449–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goatley CHR, Bellwood DR, Bellwood O (2010) Fishes on coral reefs: changing roles over the past 240 million years. Paleobiology 36:415–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gregory RS, Levings CD (1996) The effects of turbidity and vegetation on the risk of juvenile salmonids, Oncorhynchus spp., to predation by adult cutthroat trout, O. clarkii. Environ Biol Fish 47:279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gregory RS, Northcote TG (1993) Surface, planktonic, and benthic foraging by juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50:241–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hartman EJ, Abrahams MV (2000) Sensory compensation and the detection of predators: the interaction betweem chemical and visual information. Proc B Soc Lond B 267:571–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hect T, Van de Lingen CD (1992) Turbidity-induced changes in feeding strategies of fish in estuaries. S Afr J Zool 27:95–107Google Scholar
  19. Hixon MA (1991) Predation as a process structuring coral reef fish communities. In: Sale PF (ed) The ecology of coral reef fishes. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 475–500Google Scholar
  20. Hobson ES (1979) Interactions between piscivorous fishes and their prey. In: Stroud RH, Clepper H (eds) Predator–prey systems in fisheries management. Sport Fishing Institute, Washington, DC, pp 231–242Google Scholar
  21. Holmes T, McCormick MI (2010) Size-selectivity of predatory reef fish on juvenile prey. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 399:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Horodysky AZ, Brill RW, Warrant EJ, Musick JA, Latour RJ (2010) Comparative visual function in four piscivorous fishes inhabiting Chesapeake Bay. J Exp Biol 213:1751–1761PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones GP (1990) The importance of recruitment to the dynamics of a coral reef fish population. Ecology 71:1691–1698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones GP (1991) Postrecruitment processes in the ecology of coral reef fish populations: a multifactorial perspective. In: Sale PF (ed) The ecology of fishes on coral reefs. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 294–328Google Scholar
  25. Kroon FJ, Kuhnert PM, Henderson BL, Wilkinson SN, Kinsey-Henderson A, Abbott B, Brodie JE, Turner RDR (2012) River loads of suspended solids, nitrogen, phosphorous and herbicides delivered to the Great Barrier Reef lagoon. Mar Pollut Bull 65:167–181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Larcombe P, Ridd PV, Prytz A, Wilson B (1995) Factors controlling suspended sediment on inner-shelf coral reefs, Townsville, Australia. Coral Reefs 14:163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leahy SM, McCormick MI, Mitchell MD, Ferrari MCO (2011) To fear or to feed: the effects of turbidity on perception of risk by a marine fish. Biol Lett 7:811–813PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lima SL, Steury TD (2005) The perception of predator risk—the foundation of non-lethal predator–prey interactions. In: Barbosa P, Castellanos I (eds) Ecology of predator/prey interactions. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 166–188Google Scholar
  29. Ljunggren L, Sandström A (2007) Influence of visual conditions on foraging and growth of juvenile fishes with dissimilar sensory physiology. J Fish Biol 70:1319–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McCormick MI, Meekan MG (2007) Social facilitation of selective mortality. Ecology 88:1562–1570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McCulloch M, Fallon S, Wyndham T, Hendy E, Lough J, Barnes D (2003) Coral record of increased sediment flux to the inner Great Barrier Reef since European development. Nature 421:727–730PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miner JG, Stein RA (1996) Detection of predators and habitat choice by small bluegills: effects of turbidity and alternative prey. Trans Am Fish Soc 125:97–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ogston AS, Storlazzi CD, Field ME, Presto MK (2004) Sediment resuspension and transport patterns on a fringing reef flat, Molokai, Hawaii. Coral Reefs 23:559–569Google Scholar
  34. Reid SM, Fox MG, Whillans TH (1999) Influence of turbidity on piscivory in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 56:1362–1369Google Scholar
  35. Rowe DK, Dean TL (1998) Effects of turbidity on the feeding ability of the juvenile migrant stage of six New Zealand freshwater fish species. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 32:21–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Swenson WA (1978) Influence of turbidity on fish abundance in Western Lake Superior. Research report of the United State Environmental Protection Agency, Duluth, pp 1–84Google Scholar
  37. Utne AC (1997) The effect of turbidity and illumination on the reaction distance and search time of the marine planktivore Gobiusculus flavescens. J Fish Biol 50:926–938Google Scholar
  38. Utne-Palm AC (1999) The effect of prey mobility, prey contrast, turbidity and spectral composition on the reaction distance of Gobiusculus flavescens to its planktonic prey. J Fish Biol 54:1244–1258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Utne-Palm AC (2002) Visual feeding of fish in a turbid environment: physical and behavioural aspects. Mar Freshw Behav Physiol 35:111–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wenger AS, Johansen JL, Jones GP (2011) Suspended sediment impairs habitat choice and chemosensory discrimination in two coral reef fishes. Coral Reefs 30:879–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wenger AS, Johansen JL, Jones GP (2012) Increasing suspended sediment reduces foraging, growth and condition of a planktivorous damselfish. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 428:43–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. S. Wenger
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • M. I. McCormick
    • 1
  • I. M. McLeod
    • 1
  • G. P. Jones
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Marine and Tropical Biology, ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef StudiesJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia
  2. 2.Catchment to Reef Research Group, TropWATERJames Cook UniversityTownsvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations