Diet reveals links between morphology and foraging in a cryptic temperate reef fish

A global synthesis of predation on bivalves

Predation is a dominant structuring force in ecological communities. In aquatic environments, predation on bivalves has long been an important focal interaction for ecological study because bivalves have central roles as ecosystem engineers, basal components of food webs, and commercial commodities. Studies of bivalves are common, not only because of bivalves' central roles, but also due to the relative ease of studying predatory effects on this taxonomic group. To understand patterns in the interactions of bivalves and their predators we synthesised data from 52 years of peer-reviewed studies on bivalve predation. Using a systematic search, we compiled 1334 studies from 75 countries, comprising 61 bivalve families (N = 2259), dominated by Mytilidae (29% of bivalves), Veneridae (14%), Ostreidae (8%), Unionidae (7%), and Dreissenidae and Tellinidae (6% each). A total of 2036 predators were studied, with crustaceans the most studied predator group (34% of predators), followed by fishes (24%), molluscs (17%), echinoderms (10%) and birds (6%). The majority of studies (86%) were conducted in marine systems, in part driven by the high commercial value of marine bivalves. Studies in freshwater ecosystems were dominated by non-native bivalves and non-native predator species, which probably reflects the important role of biological invasions affecting freshwater biodiversity. In fact, while 81% of the studied marine bivalve species were native, only 50% of the freshwater species were native to the system. In terms of approach, most studies used predation trials, visual analysis of digested contents and exclusion experiments to assess the effects of predation. These studies reflect that many factors influence bivalve predation depending on the species studied, including (i) species traits (e.g. behaviour, morphology, defence mechanisms), (ii) other biotic interactions (e.g. presence of competitors, parasites or diseases), and (iii) environmental context (e.g. temperature, current velocity, beach exposure, habitat complexity). There is a lack of research on the effects of bivalve predation at the population and community and ecosystem levels (only 7% and 0.5% of studies respectively examined impacts at these levels). At the population level, the available studies demonstrate that predation can decrease bivalve density through consumption or the reduction of recruitment. At the community and ecosystem level, predation can trigger effects that cascade through trophic levels or effects that alter the ecological functions bivalves perform. Given the conservation and commercial importance of many bivalve species, studies of predation should be pursued in the context of global change, particularly climate change, acidification and biological invasions.

Diet reveals links between morphology and foraging in a cryptic temperate reef fish

Predators select prey so as to maximize energy and minimize manipulation time. In order to reduce prey detection and handling time, individuals must actively select their foraging space (microhabitat) and populations exhibit morphologies that are best suited for capturing locally available prey. We explored how variation in diet correlates with habitat type, and how these factors influence key morphological structures (mouth gape, eye diameter, fin length, fin area, and pectoral fin ratio) in a common microcarnivorous cryptic reef fish species, the triplefin Helcogrammoides cunninghami. In a mensurative experiment carried out at six kelp‐dominated sites, we observed considerable differences in diet along 400 km of the Chilean coast coincident with variation in habitat availability and prey distributions. Triplefins preferred a single prey type (bivalves or barnacles) at northern sites, coincident with a low diversity of foraging habitats. In contrast, southern sites presented varied and heterogeneous habitats, where triplefin diets were more diverse and included amphipods, decapods, and cumaceans. Allometry‐corrected results indicated that some morphological structures were consistently correlated with different prey items. Specifically, large mouth gape was associated with the capture of highly mobile prey such as decapods, while small mouth gape was more associated with cumaceans and copepods. In contrast, triplefins that capture sessile prey such as hydroids tend to have larger eyes. Therefore, morphological structures co‐vary with habitat selection and prey usage in this species. Our study shows how an abundant generalist reef fish exhibits variable feeding morphologies in response to the distribution of potential habitats and prey throughout its range.