Divergence in foraging and predator avoidance behavior across the geographic range of native and non-native crayfish
There is growing evidence that species’ traits may diverge during biological invasions; however, we still lack a general understanding of how the invasion process affects behavior. We used a biogeographic approach to compare foraging and antipredator behavior across a reciprocal invasion (in which each species invaded the native range of the other) of virile (Faxonius virilis) and rusty crayfish (F. rusticus). We hypothesized that the invasion process would select for individuals that invest more in foraging and less in defense than their native counterparts. We used laboratory experiments to examine crayfish boldness, activity, and foraging voracity and mesocosm experiments to examine antipredator behavior in response to fish. Non-native virile crayfish (Indiana, USA) were less bold, active and voracious than native virile crayfish (Wisconsin, USA), and they exhibited more antipredator behavior. Non-native rusty crayfish (Wisconsin) were more active in mesocosms and exhibited less antipredator behavior than native rusty crayfish (Indiana). Combined, these findings suggest a growth/mortality trade-off. Counter to our hypothesis, relative investment in foraging versus predator avoidance differed across regions and was not consistently associated with native or invasive populations. Thus, the substantial divergence in behavior we observed may by driven by local adaptation.
KeywordsGrowth-mortality trade-off Invasive species Evolution Plasticity Predation Competition
For help with crayfish collection and husbandry, we thank 2016 Central Michigan University (CMU) Great Lakes Summer Research Program students, students in the Pintor Lab at The Ohio State University (OSU), the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Trout Lake Station Staff, and Y Guy and R Zhu. In addition, we are grateful to the CMU Biological Station staff for assistance with mesocosm setup and maintenance and R Clark for assistance with fabrication of experimental equipment. This work was supported by OSU School of Environment and Natural Resources; the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center; and CMU Institute for Great Lakes Research. This manuscript is contribution 136 to CMU’s Institute for Great Lakes Research.
- Bassar, R. D., M. C. Marshall, A. López-Sepulcre, E. Zandonà, S. K. Auer, J. Travis, C. M. Pringle, A. S. Flecker, S. A. Thomas, D. F. Fraser, D. N. Reznick, A. Lopez-Sepulcre, E. Zandona, S. K. Auer, J. Travis, C. M. Pringle, A. S. Flecker, S. A. Thomas, D. F. Fraser & D. N. Reznick, 2010. Local adaptation in Trinidadian guppies alters ecosystem processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107: 3616–3621.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Boschung, H. T., J. D. Williams, D. W. Gotshall, D. K. Caldwell, M. C. Caldwell, C. Nehring & J. Verner, 1983. The Audubon Society field guide to North American fishes, whales, and dolphins. Alfred A, Knopf.Google Scholar
- Dick, J. T. A., C. Laverty, J. J. Lennon, D. Barrios-O’Neill, P. J. Mensink, J. Robert Britton, V. Médoc, P. Boets, M. E. Alexander, N. G. Taylor, A. M. Dunn, M. J. Hatcher, P. J. Rosewarne, S. Crookes, H. J. MacIsaac, M. Xu, A. Ricciardi, R. J. Wasserman, B. R. Ellender, O. L. F. Weyl, F. E. Lucy, P. B. Banks, J. A. Dodd, C. MacNeil, M. R. Penk, D. C. Aldridge, & J. M. Caffrey, 2017. Invader Relative Impact Potential: a new metric to understand and predict the ecological impacts of existing, emerging and future invasive alien species. Journal of Applied Ecology 54:1259–1267.Google Scholar
- Eberly, W. R., 1955. Summary of the distribution of Indiana crayfishes, including new state and county records. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science 64: 281–283.Google Scholar
- Giraudoux, P., 2017. pgirmess: data analysis in ecology. R package version 1.6.7Google Scholar
- Kuznetsova, A., P. B. Brockhoff & R. H. B. Christensen, 2016. lmerTest: tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0-33.Google Scholar
- Peters, B. W., 2010. Evaluating strategies for controlling invasive crayfish using human and fish predation. MS Thesis. Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
- Savolainen, R., K. Westman & M. Pursiainen, 1997. Fecundity of Finnish noble crayfish, Astacus astacus, and signal crayfish, Pacifastacus leniusculus (Dana), females in various natural habitats and in culture in Finland. Freshwater Crayfish 11: 319–338.Google Scholar
- Simon, T. P., 2001. Checklist of the crayfish and freshwater shrimp (decapoda) of Indiana. Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science 110: 104–110.Google Scholar
- Taugbol, T. & J. Skurdal, 1992. Growth, mortality and moulting rate of noble crayfish, Astacus astacus L., juveniles in aquaculture experiments. Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 23: 411–420.Google Scholar
- Taylor, C. A., G. A. Schuster, & D. B. Wylie, 2015. Field guide to crayfishes of the midwest. Illinios Natural Hisotry Survey Manual.Google Scholar
- Thoma, R. F. & R. F. Jezerinac, 2000. Ohio crayfish and shrimp atlas. Ohio Biological Survey, Columbus.Google Scholar
- U.S. Geological Survey, 2016. National Water Information System data available on the World Wide Web (USGS Water Data for the Nation), accessed (June 13, 2019), [available on internet at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/].
- Wilson, K. A., J. J. Magnuson, D. M. Lodge, A. M. Hill, T. K. Kratz, W. L. Perry & T. V. Willis, 2004. A long-term rusty crayfish (Orconectes rusticus) invasion: dispersal patterns and community change in a north temperate lake. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 61: 2255–2266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar