Effects of predator confusion on functional responses.

When confronted with a swarm of their prey, many predators become confused and are less successful in their attacks. To shed light on the ecological, ethological and evolutionary consequences of predator confusion, we here investigate its effects on predator functional responses. We develop the first functional response model that considers confusion and compare it (1) qualitatively as well as (2) quantitatively to empirical data from two predator–prey systems, Aeshna cyanea (Odonata)–Daphnia magna (Crustacea) and Chaoborus obscuripes (Diptera)–Daphnia obtusa. (1) The qualitative comparisons show that, contrary to common belief, confusion does not necessarily lead to a dome-shaped functional response. The response can alternatively remain qualitatively unchanged and be affected only quantitatively. A non-dome-shaped response is thus no indication for the absence of predator confusion. The same is true for other swarming effects reducing foraging success, such as early warning of approaching predators. Our results hence question studies that have equated the absence of a dome-shaped response with the absence of a swarming effect. Our results also resolve the apparent paradox that swarming effects are quite common while dome-shaped functional responses are rather uncommon. (2) There is a good quantitative match between a parameterized version of our model and the empirically measured functional response in the Chaoborus-Daphnia system, suggesting that all crucial factors in this system are captured by the model.

[1]  R. Furness,et al.  Does Holling's disc equation explain the functional response of a kleptoparasite? , 2001 .

[2]  O. Kleiven,et al.  Diel horizontal migration and swarm formation in Daphnia in response to Chaoborus , 2004, Hydrobiologia.

[3]  M. Solomon The Natural Control of Animal Populations , 1949 .

[4]  Penelope J. Watt,et al.  Whirligig beetle aggregations: what are the costs and the benefits? , 1998, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[5]  V. S. Ivlev,et al.  Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes , 1962 .

[6]  R. Tollrian,et al.  Density-dependent effects of prey defences , 2000, Oecologia.

[7]  J. Grover,et al.  The unselfish swarm , 1994 .

[8]  L. Giguère The estimation of crop evacuation rates in Chaoborus larvae (Diptera: Chaoboridae) using natural prey , 1986 .

[9]  B. Heinrich,et al.  Aggregation and foraging behavior of whirligig beetles (Gyrinidae) , 1980, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[10]  Evidence for a diurnal horizontal migration in Daphnia hyalina lacustris Sars , 2004, Hydrobiologia.

[11]  P. J. Hughesdon,et al.  The Struggle for Existence , 1927, Nature.

[12]  S. Dodson,et al.  Size-specific swimming behavior of Daphnia pulex , 1991 .

[13]  R. R. Krausz Living in Groups , 2013 .

[14]  Jonathan M. Jeschke,et al.  PREDATOR FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES: DISCRIMINATING BETWEEN HANDLING AND DIGESTING PREY , 2002 .

[15]  juncea dragonflies Prey to predator size ratio influences foraging efficiency of larval Aeshna juncea dragonflies , 2022 .

[16]  D. Rogers,et al.  Random search and insect population models , 1972 .

[17]  W. Murdoch,et al.  EFFECTS OF FEEDING HISTORY ON SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES IN NOTONECTA HOFFMANNI , 1978 .

[18]  C. S. Holling Some Characteristics of Simple Types of Predation and Parasitism , 1959, The Canadian Entomologist.

[19]  F. James Rohlf,et al.  Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research , 1969 .

[20]  L. Buss Group Living, Competition, and the Evolution of Cooperation in a Sessile Invertebrate , 1981, Science.

[21]  T. Royama A comparative study of models for predation and parasitism , 2006, Researches on Population Ecology.

[22]  C. S. Holling,et al.  The functional response of predators to prey density and its role in mimicry and population regulation. , 1965 .

[23]  M. Milinski Can an experienced predator overcome the confusion of swarming prey more easily? , 1979, Animal Behaviour.

[24]  C. S. Holling The components of prédation as revealed by a study of small-mammal prédation of the European pine sawfly. , 1959 .

[25]  G. Gauze The struggle for existence, by G. F. Gause. , 1934 .

[26]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments , 1993 .

[27]  R. Pastorok PREY VULNERABILITY AND SIZE SELECTION BY CHAOBORUS LARVAE , 1981 .

[28]  J. Krebs,et al.  Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach , 1978 .

[29]  Ralph Tollrian,et al.  Consumer‐food systems: why type I functional responses are exclusive to filter feeders , 2004, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[30]  W. Cresswell,et al.  Flocking is an effective anti-predation strategy in redshanks, Tringa totanus , 1994, Animal Behaviour.

[31]  Joseph Travis,et al.  How can the functional response best be determined? , 2004, Oecologia.

[32]  Peter A. Abrams,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR ON THE TYPE-2 FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE' , 1990 .

[33]  S. Menrad,et al.  Applied logistic regression analysis , 1995 .

[34]  C. Brönmark,et al.  Anti-predator adaptations in a neustonic insect (Velia caprai) , 1984, Oecologia.

[35]  D. Krakauer Groups confuse predators by exploiting perceptual bottlenecks: a connectionist model of the confusion effect , 1995, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[36]  B. Malone,et al.  Horizontal patchiness in zooplankton populations in two Ontario kettle lakes , 1983, Hydrobiologia.