Comparing 3-D visual and 2-D tactile encounter rates in benthic and pelagic habitats

Avatar
Poster
Voice is AI-generated
Connected to paperThis paper is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review

Comparing 3-D visual and 2-D tactile encounter rates in benthic and pelagic habitats

Authors

Forbes, E. J.; Stockwell, J. D.

Abstract

Encounter rate models are important tools for evaluating and estimating trophic interactions between species. While encounter rate parameters have been measured for many freshwater pelagic fishes, most benthic fishes remain mostly unstudied. Those few efforts to generate encounter rate models for benthic fishes often hold mathematical assumptions based on visual foraging, despite the many cases in which benthic fishes employ the lateral line to forage. Furthermore, encounter rate models are rarely compared, despite the many cases in which prey animals face predation risk from multiple types of predators. For example, the macroinvertebrate Mysis is exposed to both benthic and pelagic predation risk during diel vertical migration (DVM). Comparing the risks between habitats could help evaluate predation risk as an ultimate cause of their DVM behavior. We created a novel encounter rate model based on lateral line ('tactile') foraging by sculpins (Cottidae) given the saltatory (stop-and-go) nature of their movement. The tactile model demonstrated variation in behavior and peak encounter rate with detection distance, movement velocity, and rest durations. We then directly compared predation risk for Mysis by parameterizing both our tactile benthic (2D) encounter rate model for sculpin and a visual pelagic (3D) for rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax). Tactile encounter rates were generally lower than visual rates for individual predators. However, population level encounter rates at night were greater in the benthic habitat than the pelagic habitat. Overall, our model estimates of encounter rates were consistent with the long-standing hypothesis that predation is an ultimate driver of DVM behavior.

Follow Us on

0 comments

Add comment