Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Habitat structure changes the relationships between predator behavior, prey behavior, and prey survival rates

  • Highlighted Student Research
  • Published:
Oecologia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The individual behavioral traits of predators and prey sometimes determine the outcome of their interactions. Here, we examine whether changes to habitat complexity alter the effects of predator and prey behavior on their survival rates. Specifically, we test whether behavioral traits (activity level, boldness, and perch height) measured in predators and prey or multivariate behavioral volumes best predict the survival rates of both trophic levels in staged mesocosms with contrasting structural complexity. Behavioral volumes and hypervolumes are a composite group-level behavioral diversity metric built from the individual-level behavioral traits we measured in predators and prey. We stocked mesocosms with a host plant and groups of cannibalistic predators (n = 5 mantises/mesocosm) and their prey (n = 15 katydids/mesocosm), and mesocosms varied in the presence/absence of additional non-living climbing structures. We found that mantis survival rates were unrelated to any behavioral metric considered here, but were higher in structurally complex mesocosms. Unexpectedly, katydids were more likely to survive when mantis groups occupied larger behavioral volumes, indicating that more behaviorally diverse predator groups are less lethal. Katydid mortality was also increased when both predators and prey exhibited higher average perch heights, but this effect was increased by the addition of supplemental structure. This is consistent with the expectation that structural complexity increases the effect of intraspecific behavioral variation on prey survival rates. Collectively, these results convey that the effects of predator and prey behavior on prey survival could depend highly on the environment in which they are evaluated.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akaike H (1987) Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika 52:317–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amarasinghe M, Balasubramaniam S (1992) Structural properties of two types of mangrove stands on the northwestern coast of Sri Lanka. Ecol Mangrove Relat Ecosyst 247:17–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attrill MJ, Strong JA, Rowden AA (2000) Are macroinvertebrate communities influenced by seagrass structural complexity? Ecography 23:114–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballew NG, Mittelbach GG, Scribner KT (2017) Fitness consequences of boldness in juvenile and adult largemouth bass. Am Nat 189:396–406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer N, Réale D, Marmet J, Pisanu B, Chapuis JL (2010) Personality, space use and tick load in an introduced population of Siberian chipmunks Tamias sibiricus. J Anim Ecol 79:538–547

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2003) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang CC, Teo HY, Norma-Rashid Y, Li D (2017) Predator personality and prey behavioural predictability jointly determine foraging performance. Scie Rep 7:40734

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Connell JH (1970) A predator–prey system in the marine intertidal region. I. Balanus glandula and several predatory species of Thais. Ecol Monogr 40:49–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook W, Streams F (1984) Fish predation on Notonecta (Hemiptera): relationship between prey risk and habitat utilization. Oecologia 64:177–183

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Crowder LB, Cooper WE (1982) Habitat structural complexity and the interaction between bluegills and their prey. Ecology 63:1802–1813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cushing JM, Saleem M (1982) A predator prey model with age structure. J Math Biol 14:231–250

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dall SR, Houston AI, McNamara JM (2004) The behavioural ecology of personality: consistent individual differences from an adaptive perspective. Ecol Lett 7:734–739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diehl S (1992) Fish predation and benthic community structure: the role of omnivory and habitat complexity. Ecology 73:1646–1661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dingemanse NJ, Both C, Drent PJ, van Oers K, van Noordwijk AJ (2002) Repeatability and heritability of exploratory behaviour in great tits from the wild. Anim Behav 64:929–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiRienzo N, Pruitt JN, Hedrick AV (2013) The combined behavioural tendencies of predator and prey mediate the outcome of their interaction. Anim Behav 86:317–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eldakar OT, Dlugos MJ, Wilcox RS, Wilson DS (2009) Aggressive mating as a tragedy of the commons in the water strider Aquarius remigis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finke DL, Snyder WE (2008) Niche partitioning increases resource exploitation by diverse communities. Science 321:1488–1490

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher DN, David M, Tregenza T, Rodríguez-Muñoz R (2015) Dynamics of among-individual behavioral variation over adult lifespan in a wild insect. Behav Ecol 26:975–985

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Griffen BD, Toscano BJ, Gatto J (2012) The role of individual behavior type in mediating indirect interactions. Ecology 93:1935–1943

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hedrick AV, Kortet R (2012) Sex differences in the repeatability of boldness over metamorphosis. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 66:407–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hironori Y, Katsuhiro S (1997) Cannibalism and interspecific predation in two predatory ladybirds in relation to prey abundance in the field. Biocontrol 42:153–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulthén K, Chapman BB, Nilsson PA, Hollander J, Brönmark C (2014) Express yourself: bold individuals induce enhanced morphological defences. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 281:20132703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurd L, Eisenberg R (1984a) Experimental density manipulations of the predator Tenodera sinensis (Orthoptera: Mantidae) in an old-field community. II. The influence of mantids on arthropod community structure. J Anim Ecol 53:955–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurd L, Eisenberg RM (1984b) Experimental density manipulations of the predator Tenodera sinensis (Orthoptera: Mantidae) in an old-field community. I. Mortality, development and dispersal of juvenile mantids. J Anim Ecol 53:269–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurd L, Eisenberg RM (1990) Arthropod community responses to manipulation of a bitrophic predator guild. Ecology 71:2107–2114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakob EM, Marshall SD, Uetz GW (1996) Estimating fitness: a comparison of body condition indices. Oikos 77:61–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones C, DiRienzo N (2018) Behavioral variation post-invasion: resemblance in some, but not all, behavioral patterns among invasive and native praying mantids. Behav Process 153:92–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keiser CN, Slyder JB, Carson WP, Pruitt JN (2015) Individual differences in predators but not producers mediate the magnitude of a trophic cascade. Arthropod-Plant Interact 9:225–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keiser CN, Ingley SJ, Toscano BJ, Scharf I, Pruitt JN (2017) Habitat complexity dampens selection on prey activity level. Ethology 124:25–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurvers RH et al (2009) Personality differences explain leadership in barnacle geese. Anim Behav 78:447–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein JL, Chism GT, Kamath A, Pruitt JN (2017a) Intraindividual behavioral variability predicts foraging outcome in a beach-dwelling jumping spider. Sci Rep 7:18063

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein JL, Wright CM, McEwen B, Pinter-Wollman N, Pruitt JN (2017b) The multidimensional behavioural hypervolumes of two interacting species predict their space use and survival. Anim Behav 132:129–136

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein JL, Rice HK, Pruitt JN (2018) Personality variation in two predator species does not impact prey species survival or plant damage in staged mesocosms. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 72:70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell MJ, Stiles EW (1983) The structural complexity of old field vegetation and the recruitment of bird-dispersed plant species. Oecologia 56:109–116

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McElhinny C, Gibbons P, Brack C, Bauhus J (2005) Forest and woodland stand structural complexity: its definition and measurement. For Ecol Manag 218:1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGhee KE, Pintor LM, Suhr EL, Bell AM (2012) Maternal exposure to predation risk decreases offspring antipredator behaviour and survival in threespined stickleback. Funct Ecol 26:932–940

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Moran V (1980) Interactions between phytophagous insects and their Opuntia hosts. Ecol Entomol 5:153–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moran MD, Hurd L (1997) A trophic cascade in a diverse arthropod community caused by a generalist arthropod predator. Oecologia 113:126–132

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moran MD, Rooney TP, Hurd L (1996) Top-down cascade from a bitrophic predator in an old-field community. Ecology 77:2219–2227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller T, Müller C (2015) Behavioural phenotypes over the lifetime of a holometabolous insect. Front Zool 12:S8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nakagawa S, Schielzeth H (2013) A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods Ecol Evol 4:133–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä PT, Vainikka A, Hedrick AV, Kortet R (2012) Integrating behaviour with life history: boldness of the field cricket, Gryllus integer, during ontogeny. Funct Ecol 26:450–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearish S, Hostert L, Bell AM (2013) Behavioral type—environment correlations in the field: a study of three-spined stickleback. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 67:765–774

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Polis GA, Myers CA, Holt RD (1989) The ecology and evolution of intraguild predation: potential competitors that eat each other. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:297–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preisser EL, Orrock JL, Schmitz OJ (2007) Predator hunting mode and habitat domain alter nonconsumptive effects in predator–prey interactions. Ecology 88:2744–2751

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prete FR, Hurd LE, Wells PH (1999) The praying mantids. JHU Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt JN, Ferrari MC (2011) Intraspecific trait variants determine the nature of interspecific interactions in a habitat-forming species. Ecology 92:1902–1908

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt JN, Bolnick DI, Sih A, DiRienzo N, Pinter-Wollman N (2016) Behavioural hypervolumes of spider communities predict community performance and disbandment. Proc R Soc B 283:20161409

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt JN et al (2017) Behavioral hypervolumes of predator groups and predator-predator interactions shape prey survival rates and selection on prey behavior. Am Nat 189:254–266

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Qin J, Fast AW (1996) Size and feed dependent cannibalism with juvenile snakehead Channa striatus. Aquaculture 144:313–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosseel Y (2012) Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling and more. Version 0.5–12 (BETA). J Stat Softw 48:1–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royauté R, Pruitt JN (2015) Varying predator personalities generates contrasting prey communities in an agroecosystem. Ecology 96:2902–2911

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz OJ (2007) Predator diversity and trophic interactions. Ecology 88:2415–2426

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sih A, Watters JV (2005) The mix matters: behavioural types and group dynamics in water striders. Behaviour 142:1417–1431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sih A, Englund G, Wooster D (1998) Emergent impacts of multiple predators on prey. Trends Ecol Evol 13:350–355

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sih A, Kats LB, Maurer EF (2003) Behavioural correlations across situations and the evolution of antipredator behaviour in a sunfish–salamander system. Anim Behav 65:29–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sih A, Bell A, Johnson JC (2004) Behavioral syndromes: an ecological and evolutionary overview. Trends Ecol Evol 19:372–378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sih A, Cote J, Evans M, Fogarty S, Pruitt J (2012) Ecological implications of behavioural syndromes. Ecol Lett 15:278–289

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith BR, Blumstein DT (2008) Fitness consequences of personality: a meta-analysis. Behav Ecol 19:448–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soluk DA (1993) Multiple predator effects: predicting combined functional response of stream fish and invertebrate predators. Ecology 74:219–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Southwood TR, Brown V, Reader P (1979) The relationships of plant and insect diversities in succession. Biol J Lin Soc 12:327–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiegel O, Leu ST, Sih A, Godfrey SS, Bull CM (2015) When the going gets tough: behavioural type-dependent space use in the sleepy lizard changes as the season dries. Proc R Soc B 282:20151768

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sugihara G, May RM (1990) Applications of fractals in ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 5:79–86

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney K, Cusack B, Armagost F, O’Brien T, Keiser CN, Pruitt JN (2013) Predator and prey activity levels jointly influence the outcome of long-term foraging bouts. Behav Ecol 24:1205–1210

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson D (1975) Towards a predator-prey model incorporating age structure: the effects of predator and prey size on the predation of Daphnia magna by Ischnura elegans. J Anim Ecol 44:907–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toscano BJ, Griffen BD (2014) Trait-mediated functional responses: predator behavioural type mediates prey consumption. J Anim Ecol 83:1469–1477

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Toscano BJ, Gownaris NJ, Heerhartz SM, Monaco CJ (2016) Personality, foraging behavior and specialization: integrating behavioral and food web ecology at the individual level. Oecologia 182:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uetz G (1991) Habitat structure and spider foraging. Habitat structure. Springer, Berlin, pp 325–348

    Google Scholar 

  • Vince S, Valiela I, Backus N, Teal J (1976) Predation by the salt marsh killifish Fundulus heteroclitus (L.) in relation to prey size and habitat structure: consequences for prey distribution and abundance. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 23:255–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson AD, McLaughlin RL (2007) Behavioural syndromes in brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis: prey-search in the field corresponds with space use in novel laboratory situations. Anim Behav 74:689–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson DS, Coleman K, Clark AB, Biederman L (1993) Shy-bold continuum in pumpkinseed sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus): an ecological study of a psychological trait. J Comp Psychol 107:250

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding for this research was provided by the University of California (Santa Barbara), National Science Foundation grant awards to JNP (1352705 and 1455895), and a National Institutes of Health grant awarded to JNP (R01GM115509). We also thank the Pymatuning Laboratory of Ecology of the University of Pittsburgh for hosting our research. Particularly we thank Dr. Cori Richards-Zawacki and Chris Davis for helping navigate the process of working at a research institution not affiliated with our own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, 93106, USA

    James L. L. Lichtenstein, Colin M. Wright, Grant Navid Doering & Jonathan N. Pruitt

  2. Department of Biology, Wilson College, Chambersburg, PA, 17201, USA

    Karis A. Daniel

  3. Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, B3H 4R2, Canada

    Joanna B. Wong

  4. Department of Ecology, São Paolo State University, São Paolo, 01049-010, Brazil

    Raul Costa-Pereira

Authors
  1. James L. L. Lichtenstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karis A. Daniel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joanna B. Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Colin M. Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Grant Navid Doering
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Raul Costa-Pereira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jonathan N. Pruitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

JLLL designed the experiment, collected data, and wrote the manuscript. KAD and JBW contributed to data collection and writing. GND calculated behavioral volumes and contributed to writing. RCP performed path analyses and contributed to writing. CMW and JNP helped with experimental design and writing. All authors approved the manuscript in its current form.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James L. L. Lichtenstein.

Additional information

Communicated by George Heimpel.

We predict where and when predator behavior determines prey survival. Our results reveal that structurally complex habitats increase the effects of predator behavioral tendencies on prey survival.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (docx 85 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lichtenstein, J.L.L., Daniel, K.A., Wong, J.B. et al. Habitat structure changes the relationships between predator behavior, prey behavior, and prey survival rates. Oecologia 190, 297–308 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04344-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-019-04344-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation