Skip to main content
Log in

Influence of a predator on the optimal foraging behaviour of sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.)

  • Letter
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Abstract

ACCORDING to the principle of natural selection, each individual animal is assumed to maximise its inclusive fitness1. Thus, observed behaviour patterns should result from optimisation processes involving costs and benefits measured in a currency of fitness2,3. Certain foraging strategies have been shown to maximise energy intake per unit time3–6. Maximisation of the rate of energy intake, however, is an optimal strategy only if feeding behaviour does not conflict with other needs, such as the detection of predators. If the foraging animal runs a high risk of being preyed upon, the optimal strategy may be a compromise of both needs. A predator's influence on optimal foraging has been dealt with, so far, only in a hypothetical manner3,5. We have investigated this problem experimentally using three-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) attacking a swarm of water fleas (Daphnia magna). We report here that after exposure to a model of an avian predator the sticklebacks' foraging behaviour changes such that they attack swarm regions of lower density which provide a lower feeding rate but should increase their ability to detect an approaching predator. This is predicted by a model using Pontryagin's principle of maximisation.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hamilton, W. D. J. Theor. Biol. 7, 1–53 (1964).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sibly, R. & McFarland, D. Am. Nat. 110, 601–617 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Schoener, T. W. A. Rev. ecol. Sys. 2, 369–404 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Krebs, J. R., Erichsen, J. T., Webber, M. I. & Charnov, E. L. Anim. Behav. 25, 30–38 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Charnov, E. L. Am. Nat. 110, 141–151 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Pyke, G. H., Pulliam, H. R. & Charnov, E. L. Quart. Rev. Biol. 52, 137–154 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Milinski, M. Z. Tierpsychol. 45, 373–388 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Miller, R. C. Ecology 3, 122–126 (1922).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Welty, J. C. Physiol. Zool. 7, 85–128 (1934).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Clark, C. W. Mathematical Bioeconomics: The Optimal Management of Renewable Resources. (Wiley & Sons, New York, 1976).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Grzimek, B. Grzimeks Tierleben IX Vögel (Kindler, Zurich, 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Phillips, G. C. thesis Univ. Oxford (1962).

  13. Huntingford, F. A. thesis Univ. Oxford (1974).

  14. Tugendhat, B. Science 132, 896–897 (1960).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Powell, G. V. N. Anim. Behav. 22, 501–505 (1974).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

MILINSKI, M., HELLER, R. Influence of a predator on the optimal foraging behaviour of sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.). Nature 275, 642–644 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1038/275642a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/275642a0

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Navigation