Shoals Receive more Attacks from the Wolf‐Fish (Hoplias malabaricus Bloch, 1794)
Abstract
We investigated whether the piscivorous wolf‐fish,Hoplias malabaricus(Bloch, 1794), showed preferences for attacking a ‘straggler’ or a shoal using guppies,Poecilia reticulata(Peters, 1860), as prey. Predators should show a preference to attack single prey items rather than grouped prey to overcome the confusion effect, which has been shown to negatively affect their capture success. However, they may attack groups more frequently because they are more likely to detect them because of their greater conspicuousness. In our study we looked at predator choice for grouped or single prey and whether this was affected by larger shoals being more conspicuous. We offeredHopliasbinary choices of a single guppy (straggler) and shoals of 2, 6 and 10 fish.Hopliaspreferred to attack the shoal over the straggler with regards to both frequency of attacks (initial and subsequent) and attack duration. The implications for predator–prey interactions of such a preference are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Predators may preferentially attack large schools if school size increases the conspicuousness and detectability of prey.
“Predators may preferentially attack large schools if school size increases the conspicuousness and detectability of prey (Botham & Krause 2005), and not all predators succumb equally to the confusion effect attributed to schools (Turesson & Brönmark 2004).”
From Diet of invasive lionfish on hard bottom reefs of the Southeast USA: insights from stomach contents and stable isotopes (2011) · cites this paper as Botham & Krause 2005
Cites
Foraging behaviour and capture success in perch, pikeperch and pike and the effects of prey density
Turesson, H., & Brönmark, C. (2004) · Journal of Fish Biology · doi:10.1111/j.0022-1112.2004.00455.x · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Muñoz, R., Currin, C., & Whitfield, P. (2011) · Marine Ecology Progress Series · doi:10.3354/meps09154 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
- Authors
- Botham, M. S., & Krause, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Leeds (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Botham, Marc S.
- Venue
- Ethology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-09-16
- Volume
- 111
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 881-890
- ISSN
- 0179-1613 (ISSN-L)
- 1439-0310
- OpenAlex
- W1992178268
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 0.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ethology (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Leeds
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish biology, ecology, and behavior
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ichthyology and Marine Biology
- Keywords
- Hoplias malabaricus, Poecilia reticulata, predator-prey interactions, shoal size, confusion effect, attack behavior, piscivores
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review