Effects of habitat complexity on the aggressive behaviour of the American lobster (Homarus americanus) in captivity

Cenni, Federica; Parisi, Giuliana; Gherardi, Francesca

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2009.11.007

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here, we also report that in intraspecific contests, aggression scores were reduced under high complexity conditions, in contrast to Baird et al, (2006) who reported no effect of habitat complexity on aggression scores between groups of freshwater crayfish. Furthermore, contrary to expectations, time spent interacting was not affected by habitat complexity which is also inconsistent with previous studies which report reduced time spent interacting in high complexity conditions (Baird et al, 2006; Barley & Coleman, 2010; Cenni et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Among extrinsic factors, habitat complexity can influence aggression in both intraspecific and interspecific interactions. For example, high complexity conditions have resulted in reduced aggression between conspecifics in convict cichlids (Barley & Coleman, 2010), zebrafish (Basquill & Grant, 1998), Atlantic salmon (Bilhete & Grant, 2016), freshwater crayfish (Baird et al, 2006;Corkum & Cronin, 2004) and American lobsters (Cenni et al, 2009) compared to low complexity conditions. Between heterospecifics, the same pattern has been reported in Malawai cichlids (Danley, 2011) and salmonids (Hasegawa & Maekawa, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does habitat complexity and prior residency influence aggression between invasive and native freshwater crayfish?

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aggressive encounters between invasive and native species are considered a key threat associated with the spread of invasive species. Extrinsic factors such as habitat complexity can profoundly influence the outcome of aggressive interactions between conspecifics, and this may also be the case in invasive‐native species interactions. This study used invasive and native freshwater crayfish species in Australia as a model system to investigate the influence of habitat complexity on aggression in both intraspecific and interspecific contests. Paired contests between the native Euastacus spinifer and the invasive Cherax destructor were conducted in the laboratory under high and low habitat complexity conditions. Furthermore, the influence of prior residency was examined, with one individual assigned the resident and the other as the intruder. In intraspecific contests, the number of interactions and aggression score were significantly reduced under high complexity conditions; however, complexity had no effect on the time spent interacting and contest outcome. Instead, the two crayfish species differed in terms of time spent interacting. In interspecific contests, complexity had no effect on any of the aggression metrics. Alarmingly, however, we demonstrate that when C. destructor was a resident the likelihood that E. spinifer won a contest fell to a mere 8% compared to 31% when E. spinifer was resident. This study suggests that while habitat complexity plays a role in shaping aggressive behaviour in intraspecific interactions, invasive species are competitively dominant if they are already established i.e. resident in a location and even as intruders. Therefore, preserving habitat complexity in freshwater systems may not be sufficient to sustain populations of native species, and other measures that mitigate the potential for range overlap between the species would also be needed to prevent the further spread of invasive species such as C. destructor within freshwater ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does habitat complexity and prior residency influence aggression between invasive and native freshwater crayfish?

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…164,165 Enrichment is proven to be effective for many species, including fishes, [166][167][168] cephalopods and other invertebrates. 138,[169][170][171][172][173][174][175] Enrichment may be accomplished through changes in the tank environment, for example, by varying factors, such as the shape of the tank, flow of water, variety of live prey items (if these are essential), conspecifics and environmental complexity; and also by providing opportunities for animals to engage in specific activities and exercise some choice.…”

Section: Environmental Enrichmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…164,165 Enrichment is proven to be effective for many species, including fishes, 166–168 cephalopods and other invertebrates. 138,169–175…”

Section: Accommodation and Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines for the Care and Welfare of Cephalopods in Research –A consensus based on an initiative by CephRes, FELASA and the Boyd Group

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is the result of an international initiative and is a first attempt to develop guidelines for the care and welfare of cephalopods (i.e. nautilus, cuttlefish, squid and octopus) following the inclusion of this Class of ∼700 known living invertebrate species in Directive 2010/63/EU. It aims to provide information for investigators, animal care committees, facility managers and animal care staff which will assist in improving both the care given to cephalopods, and the manner in which experimental procedures are carried out. Topics covered include: implications of the Directive for cephalopod research; project application requirements and the authorisation process; the application of the 3Rs principles; the need for harm-benefit assessment and severity classification. Guidelines and species-specific requirements are provided on: i. supply, capture and transport; ii. environmental characteristics and design of facilities (e.g. water quality control, lighting requirements, vibration/noise sensitivity); iii. accommodation and care (including tank design), animal handling, feeding and environmental enrichment; iv. assessment of health and welfare (e.g. monitoring biomarkers, physical and behavioural signs); v. approaches to severity assessment; vi. disease (causes, prevention and treatment); vii. scientific procedures, general anaesthesia and analgesia, methods of humane killing and confirmation of death. Sections covering risk assessment for operators and education and training requirements for carers, researchers and veterinarians are also included. Detailed aspects of care and welfare requirements for the main laboratory species currently used are summarised in Appendices. Knowledge gaps are highlighted to prompt research to enhance the evidence base for future revision of these guidelines.

show abstract

“…For example, increasing structural complexity can decrease [ 19 – 21 ] or increase aggression [ 22 ]. Drastic contrast between physical environments is not necessary for highlighting this effect; simply adding bricks [ 23 ] or gravel [ 24 ] to an animal’s surroundings can be sufficient to decrease the frequency of aggressive encounters. Similarly, relatively small increases in turbidity can decrease the size of guppy social groups [ 25 ], and increasing the amount of available space can impact near-neighbor distances even when the animals are not crowded [ 26 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent experience impacts social behavior in a novel context by adult zebrafish (Danio rerio)

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many animals exhibit behavioral plasticity as they move between habitats seasonally, reside in fluctuating environments, or respond to human-induced environmental change. We know that physical environment during early development can have a lasting impact on behavior, and on the neural mechanisms that shape behavior. In adults, social context can have similar persistent effects on behavior and the brain. Here, we asked whether physical context impacts adult social behavior in a novel environment. We placed groups of adult zebrafish (Danio rerio) in two different physical contexts. After two weeks, we measured group behavior in a novel context, and found that zebrafish with recent experience in a more-complex physical environment charged each other more often and tended to form tighter shoals than did fish that had been housed in less-complex environments. These differences were present regardless of the novel context in which we assayed behavior, and were not easily explained by differences in activity level. Our results demonstrate the impact of recent experiences on adult behavior, and highlight the importance of physical as well as social history in predicting animal behavior in novel situations.

show abstract

Effects of habitat complexity on the aggressive behaviour of the American lobster (Homarus americanus) in captivity

Cited by 11 publications

References 29 publications

Does habitat complexity and prior residency influence aggression between invasive and native freshwater crayfish?

Does habitat complexity and prior residency influence aggression between invasive and native freshwater crayfish?

Guidelines for the Care and Welfare of Cephalopods in Research –A consensus based on an initiative by CephRes, FELASA and the Boyd Group

Recent experience impacts social behavior in a novel context by adult zebrafish (Danio rerio)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About