Effects of successive predator attacks on prey aggregations

Lett, Christophe; Semeria, Magali; Thiebault, Andréa; Tremblay, Yann

doi:10.1007/s12080-014-0213-0

Cited by 29 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Theoretically there is evidence such associations are beneficial to both diving species and surface feeding species. Lett et al (2014) developed models which showed predators attacking successively both from above and from the side were most effective in disrupting schooling fish. Their results suggest that both surface-feeding species and diving species should have greater success when foraging together.…”

Section: Positive Interactions Among Marine Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Their results suggest that both surface-feeding species and diving species should have greater success when foraging together. Furthermore, a higher frequency of attacks, particularly if varied in direction in three-dimensional space, would prevent schooling prey from organizing themselves, and result in higher success rate among all predators (Lett et al, 2014;Thiebault et al, 2016).…”

Section: Positive Interactions Among Marine Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Grünbaum and Veit (2003) found that, at South Georgia, albatross density had a higher impact on feeding rate than did prey density, indicating, first, the importance of local enhancement (albatrosses responding to albatrosses) and second, that at low densities of prey local enhancement may not be effective. Other evidence suggests that facilitation might be very important at high prey densities (Hunt et al, 1988;Lett et al, 2014). Schneider et al (1990) identified the importance of the interaction between hydrography and local enhancement as the result of species associations; they found kittiwakes (Rissa spp.)…”

Section: Polar Seasmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Positive Interactions among Foraging Seabirds, Marine Mammals and Fishes and Implications for Their Conservation

Veit

Harrison

2017

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is increasing recognition of the importance of "positive interactions" among species in structuring communities. For seabirds, an important kind of positive interaction is the use of birds of the same species, birds of other species, and other marine predators such as cetaceans, seals and fishes as cues to the presence of prey. The process by which a single bird uses, say, a feeding flock of birds as a cue to the presence of prey is called "local enhancement" or "facilitation." There are subtly different uses of each of these terms, but the issue we address here is the ubiquity of positive interactions between seabirds and other marine predators when foraging at sea, and whether as a result of their associations the feeding success, and therefore presumably the fitness, of individual seabirds is increased. If this contention is true, then it implies that conservation of any one species of seabird must take into consideration the status and possible conservation of those species that the focal species uses as a cue while foraging. For example, conservation of great shearwaters (Ardenna gravis), which often feed over tuna (e.g., Thunnus) schools, should take in to consideration conservation of tuna. Ecosystem management depends on understanding the importance of such processes; the loss of biodiversity, and the consequent threat to foraging success, may be a substantial threat to the stability of marine ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Positive Interactions Among Marine Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Positive Interactions Among Marine Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Polar Seasmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Positive Interactions among Foraging Seabirds, Marine Mammals and Fishes and Implications for Their Conservation

Veit

Harrison

2017

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We let multiple predator agents coexist, as recent studies suggest that the cumulative effect of high frequency attacks (through disorganisation of school cohesiveness) may increase the feeding success of each individual [67, 68]. Individual predator agents enter the artificial world after an initial random interval of update steps ( re-enter time ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of Collective Behaviour in an Artificial World Using Linguistic Fuzzy Rule-Based Systems

Demšar¹,

Bajec²

2017

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collective behaviour is a fascinating and easily observable phenomenon, attractive to a wide range of researchers. In biology, computational models have been extensively used to investigate various properties of collective behaviour, such as: transfer of information across the group, benefits of grouping (defence against predation, foraging), group decision-making process, and group behaviour types. The question ‘why,’ however remains largely unanswered. Here the interest goes into which pressures led to the evolution of such behaviour, and evolutionary computational models have already been used to test various biological hypotheses. Most of these models use genetic algorithms to tune the parameters of previously presented non-evolutionary models, but very few attempt to evolve collective behaviour from scratch. Of these last, the successful attempts display clumping or swarming behaviour. Empirical evidence suggests that in fish schools there exist three classes of behaviour; swarming, milling and polarized. In this paper we present a novel, artificial life-like evolutionary model, where individual agents are governed by linguistic fuzzy rule-based systems, which is capable of evolving all three classes of behaviour.

show abstract

“…As a consequence, species from all seabird orders commonly gather at sites where prey resources are concentrated, most often in multi-species associations (Siegfried et al 1975, Hoffman et al 1981, Harrison et al 1991, Camphuysen and Webb 1999, Clua and Grosvalet 2001. In this context, individuals may benefit from group foraging (Ryan et al 2012, Lett et al 2014, Thiebault et al 2015, McInnes et al 2017) and use both visual and acoustic cues (Thiebault et al 2014b(Thiebault et al , 2016. Despite numerous descriptions of seabird aggregations (mainly from boat observations), studies addressing the mechanisms involved in their social interactions at sea have long been constrained by technical limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

At sea vocal repertoire of a foraging seabird

Thiebault

Charrier

Pistorius

et al. 2019

Journal of Avian Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seabirds spend most of their time at sea, yet our knowledge of their activities and behaviour is limited due to difficulties of in‐situ data collection. In particular, we know virtually nothing about their acoustic communication when at sea. We benefited from the recent development of miniaturised audio‐recording devices to deploy acoustic recorders on breeding Cape gannets Morus capensis to study their vocal activity while foraging. Call sequences were recorded on 1718 occasions, from which acoustic variables were measured on calls with good recording quality. A total of 1348 calls from 18 birds were measured in temporal and frequency domains. Each call was assigned to a behavioural context defined acoustically: sitting on the water, flying, taking off or just before diving. Potential discrimination among calls from different contexts was tested using the random forest algorithm. Within each context, individual stereotypy in the calls was assessed per acoustic variable using a measure of potential of individual coding, and as a combination of variables using a similar multivariate analysis. The acoustic structure differed according to the behavioural context (global accuracy of prediction 75%). Temporal variables (sequence and call duration) were most important to correctly classify the calls among the four contexts. When considering only two contexts, on the water and in the air (merging flying and diving), frequency and spectral variables (percentage of energy below 1200 Hz and fundamental frequency) were of most importance (accuracy 86%). A combination of acoustic variables was necessary to discriminate individuals, but calls from all contexts were not strongly individually distinct (accuracy 41–63%). We provided the first detailed acoustic analysis of a foraging seabird and demonstrated context‐specific acoustic structure in its vocalisations at sea. Our results suggest that seabirds use vocal communication to exchange various types of information that likely improves foraging success.

show abstract

Effects of successive predator attacks on prey aggregations

Cited by 29 publications

References 75 publications

Positive Interactions among Foraging Seabirds, Marine Mammals and Fishes and Implications for Their Conservation

Positive Interactions among Foraging Seabirds, Marine Mammals and Fishes and Implications for Their Conservation

Evolution of Collective Behaviour in an Artificial World Using Linguistic Fuzzy Rule-Based Systems

At sea vocal repertoire of a foraging seabird

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About