Skip Navigation


Behavioral Ecology Advance Access originally published online on February 4, 2009
Behavioral Ecology 2009 20(2):313-317; doi:10.1093/beheco/arp005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Lay Summary
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/2/313    most recent
arp005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Michel, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Adams, M. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Michel, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Adams, M. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Differential effects of structural complexity on predator foraging behavior

Matt J. Michela and Melinda M. Adamsb

a Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA b Department of Natural Sciences, Haskell Indian Nations University, Lawrence, KS 66046, USA

Address correspondence to M.J. Michel. E-mail: mmichel1{at}nd.edu.


  Abstract

The choice of predator foraging mode has important consequences for ecological communities. Foraging mode designations are often made on the basis of predator activity, yet activity can be affected by various environmental stimuli independent of changes in foraging mode. Structural complexity can reduce predator activity by either interfering with predator vision and mobility or as part of a foraging mode shift. We examined the effects of simulated aquatic vegetation on multiple behaviors of 2 aquatic insect predators to distinguish between these 2 possible outcomes. Larvae of the diving water beetle (Dytiscus spp.) shifted from an active predator in treatments without structure to a sit-and-pursue (SAP) predator in treatments containing structure, as indicated by a decrease in activity and prey encounter rates and an increase in probability of capture. This trade-off between encounter rates and probability of capture resulted in an equal number of prey captures among the treatments. Dragonfly nymphs (Anax junius) remained SAP predators in both treatments, although interference from the simulated vegetation significantly reduced activity. Structure also slightly decreased the number of aeshnid prey captures. Physiological attributes of the predators, such as mode of respiration and method of prey detection, seemed to influence foraging behavior. This study emphasizes the benefits of measuring multiple predator behaviors when classifying predators to particular foraging modes.

Key words: activity, Anax junius, artificial vegetation, behavioral plasticity, dytiscid larvae, tadpole.

Received 14 May 2008; revised 24 October 2008; accepted 15 November 2008.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.