A Sensory-Driven Trade-Off between Coordinated Motion in Social Prey and a Predator's Visual Confusion

Computerized stimuli for studying oddity effects

Visually hunting predators must overcome the challenges that prey groups present. One such challenge is the confusion effect where an overburdened visual system means predators are unable to successfully target prey. A strategy to overcome confusion is the targeting of distinct, or odd, individuals (the oddity effect). In live prey experiments, manipulation of group member phenotypes can be challenging and prey may differ on more than the single feature one intends to define as odd. The use of highly controllable computerized stimuli to study predator–prey interactions is increasingly popular in the field of behavioral ecology. However, to our knowledge, the validity of computerized stimuli to study the oddity effect has not been established. Predator choice experiments were conducted using naive stickleback predators to ascertain whether the oddity effect could be demonstrated in the absence of live prey. We found evidence for both the oddity effect and preferential targeting of group edges and low-density regions, as would be predicted if predators targeted prey individuals to minimize confusion. The oddity effect was evident at a low threshold, above which dots were no longer perceived as odd and no longer attacked more often than expected by chance. We conclude that computerized stimuli are an improved, practical method for studying oddity effects while further validating the use of similar methods for studying other aspects of visual predation. In addition to higher control of “prey” appearance, the replacement of live prey animals with digital stimuli is ethically beneficial and reusing code improves experimental efficiency.

Time to revisit? A predator's previous successes and failures in prey capture determine its return time to patches

In a heterogeneous environment containing multiple patches that may deplete and renew, a forager should be able to detect the quality of food resources within and among patches and choose to exploit them to best maximize returns. From the predator's perspective, the behavioral responses of the prey in a patch will be perceived as depletion when they retreat to refuge and renewal when they reemerge. A predator encountering responsive prey should manage predation risk, and thus behavioral resource depression, by optimally timing its return time to the patch based on prey behavior. We evaluated the foraging decisions of a predator that encountered patches differing in size of the refuge and prey density. We used little egrets and goldfish as predators and prey in an environment that contained three patches (pools). We manipulated prey density and refuge size and availability (using covers) and observed predator foraging behavior. When the egret had previously caught a fish it did not discriminate between the pools, and the return time was similar for all cover types. The fish densities also did not affect the egret decisions to return to pools. However, when it failed to catch fish, it returned sooner to the pool containing the small cover than the larger one. Additionally, after failing to catch fish in patches containing the highest prey density, the egrets subsequently preferred to return to such patches sooner. We show experimentally that previous failures influence the foraging decisions of a predator choosing how quickly to return to a previously visited patch.

Marginal predation: do encounter or confusion effects explain the targeting of prey group edges?

Marginal predation, also known as the edge effect, occurs when aggregations of prey are preferentially targeted on their periphery by predators and has long been established in many taxa. Two main processes have been used to explain this phenomenon, the confusion effect and the encounter rate between predators and prey group edges. However, it is unknown at what size a prey group needs to be before marginal predation is detectable and to what extent each mechanism drives the effect. We conducted 2 experiments using groups of virtual prey being preyed upon by 3-spined sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) to address these questions. In Experiment 1, we show that group sizes do not need to be large for marginal predation to occur, with this being detectable in groups of 16 or more. In Experiment 2, we find that encounter rate is a more likely explanation for marginal predation than the confusion effect in this system. We find that while confusion does affect predatory behaviors (whether or not predators make an attack), it does not affect marginal predation. Our results suggest that marginal predation is a more common phenomenon than originally thought as it also applies to relatively small groups. Similarly, as marginal predation does not need the confusion effect to occur, it may occur in a wider range of predator–prey species pairings, for example those where the predators search for prey using nonvisual sensory modalities.

A Balanced Mixture of Antagonistic Pressures Promotes the Evolution of Parallel Movement

A common hypothesis about the origins of collective behaviour suggests that animals might live and move in groups to increase their chances of surviving predator attacks. This hypothesis is supported by several studies that use computational models to simulate natural evolution. These studies, however, either tune an ad-hoc model to 'reproduce' collective behaviour, or concentrate on a single type of predation pressure, or infer the emergence of collective behaviour from an increase in prey density. In nature, prey are often targeted by multiple predator species simultaneously and this might have played a pivotal role in the evolution of collective behaviour. We expand on previous research by using an evolutionary rule-based system to simulate the evolution of prey behaviour when prey are subject to multiple simultaneous predation pressures. We analyse the evolved behaviour via prey density, polarization, and angular momentum. Our results suggest that a mixture of antagonistic external pressures that simultaneously steer prey towards grouping and dispersing might be required for prey individuals to evolve dynamic parallel movement.