Anuran tadpoles learn to recognize injury cues from members of the same prey guild

Abstract

Recognition of predation risk from cues released from injured heterospecific could be beneficial when prey belongs to the same prey guild. Here, we performed three experiments. Experiment 1 showed that P. thaul tadpoles reduced their activity levels when exposed to conspecific injury cues, but not when exposed to amphipod injury cues. Experiment 2 tested whether P. thaul tadpoles can learn to recognize predation risk from chemical cues released from injured heterospecifics from the same prey guild (amphipod, Hyalella patagonica). A group of tadpoles were conditioned by exposing them to a specific concentration of amphipod injury cues paired with conspecific injury cues. Two days later, we evaluated changes in the activity of tadpoles when they were exposed to amphipod cues. As a control of learning, we used an unpaired group. Additionally, we used more control groups to fully investigate the learning mechanism. Our results showed that tadpoles can learn to recognize predation risk from injured amphipods and that the mechanism underlying the observed learned response could be associative. Experiment 3 replicated Experiment 2 and also showed that a low concentration of amphipod cues did not sustain that learning.

Conspecific disturbance odors act as alarm cues to affect female mate choice in a treefrog

“…Similarly, long-toed salamanders (Ambystoma macrodactylum) avoided chemical alarm cues from injured conspecifics, indicating that salamanders may reduce their predation risk by avoiding areas where predators are foraging (Chivers et al 1996). Individuals showing anti-predation response to chemical alarm substances have been reported in many urodeles and larval anurans (tadpoles) (Marvin et al 2004;Gonzalo et al 2010;Sullivan and Jensen 2013;Pueta and Perotti 2016). In adult anurans (frogs), individuals generally respond to distress calls or alarm calls from conspecifics by fleeing, interrupting their activity, or decreasing call rate (Toledo et al 2015;Forti et al 2017;Hopkins and Folt 2019).…”

Is thermal sensitivity affected by predation risk? A case study in tadpoles from ephemeral environments

“…In previous studies of sister species of Pleurodema , we determined that tadpoles strongly react to chemical cues from injured conspecifics due to fear of being eaten (alarm cues; Pueta et al, 2016; Pueta & Perotti, 2016). Therefore, we expected sign of risk, such as direct predator chemical cues or alarm cues, to affect the thermal physiology of tadpoles.…”

“…In addition, in these ponds, trophic condition and interspecific interactions of top predators are affected by high temperatures due to a constraint on the activation energies (Dell et al, 2014; Katzenberger et al, 2021). Additionally, there is evidence that many aquatic animals have the ability to recognize risk from conspecific injury cues (Mirza et al, 2006; Pollock et al, 2003; Pueta & Perotti, 2016; Wisenden & Millard, 2001; Wisenden et al, 1999). The production of alarm cues by prey (kairomones) is essential to recognize potential predation (Brown et al, 1970; Gvoždík & Boukal, 2021).…”

Predatory invertebrates indirectly impact leaf‐litter breakdown by different foragers in temporary wetlands

“…The addition was made by moving a 1‐mL bulk pipette around for 10 s. To keep the experimental individual undisturbed during the test, the observer was present inside the room only when the stimulus was added and to turn the video camera on/off via remote control. Assessing activity during both the pre‐ and post‐stimulus periods is a frequently used method in behavioral studies where tadpoles are exposed to chemical cues that indicate predation risk (Pueta & Perotti, 2016; Skelly, 1994). We consider activity (time active) as any movement.…”