Habitat complexity dampens selection on prey activity level

Abstract

Conspecific prey individuals often exhibit persistent differences in behavior (i.e., animal personality) and consequently vary in their susceptibility to predation. How this form of selection varies across environmental contexts is essential to predicting ecological and evolutionary dynamics, yet remains currently unresolved. Here, we use three separate predator-prey systems (sea star-snail, wolf spider-cricket, and jumping spider-cricket) to independently examine how habitat structural complexity influences the selection that predators impose on prey behavioral types. Prior to conducting staged predator-prey interaction encounters, we ran prey individuals through multiple behavioral assays to determine their average activity level. We then allowed individual predators to interact with groups of prey in either open or structurally complex habitats and recorded the number and individual identity of prey that were eaten. Habitat complexity had no effect on overall predation rates in any of the three predator-prey systems. Despite this, we detected a pervasive interaction between habitat structure and individual prey activity level in determining individual prey survival. In open habitats, all predators imposed strong selection on prey behavioral types: sea stars preferentially consumed sedentary snails, while spiders preferentially consumed active crickets. Habitat complexity dampened selection within all three systems, equalizing the predation risk that active and sedentary prey faced. These findings suggest a general effect of habitat complexity that reduces the importance of prey activity level in determining individual predation risk. We reason this occurs because activity level (i.e., movement) is paramount in determining risk within open environments, whereas in complex habitats, other behavioral traits (e.g., escape ability to a refuge) may take precedence. K E Y W O R D Sactivity, habitat complexity, individual variation, predator-prey interactions, selection

Individual differences in behaviour explain variation in survival: a meta-analysis

“…We thank Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar and Raphaël Royauté for feedback in the methodological approach, all authors of (Schuett et al 2015) Acyrthosiphon pisum lab (Lapiedra et al 2018) Anolis sagrei wild (Piquet et al 2018) Atlantoxerus getulus wild (Foster et al 2017) Chlorostoma funebralis lab (Keiser et al 2018) Chlorostoma funebralis lab (Jablonszky et al 2018) Ficedula albicollis wild (Niemelä et al 2019) Gryllus bimaculatus lab (Santostefano et al 2017) Gryllus bimaculatus lab (Fisher et al 2015) Gryllus campestris wild 10 (Niemelä et al 2015) Gryllus campestris wild (Akçay et al 2015) Melospiza melodia amaka wild (Marshall et al 2016) Mungos mungo wild (Réale & Festa-Bianchet 2003) Ovis canadensis canadensis wild (van Overveld et al 2015)…”

Intraspecific Behavioral Variation Mediates Insect Prey Survival via Direct and Indirect Effects

“…The importance of prey traits for predatory interactions spans multiple biological scales. For example, predators exert selection on prey populations by preferentially consuming individuals with certain trait values [1][2][3][4][5][6], but also modify community structure by disproportionally consuming one prey species over another [7]. This latter effect is often ascribed to mean, species-level trait differences [8][9][10].…”

Are Cecropia trees ecosystem engineers? The effect of decomposing Cecropia leaves on arthropod communities

“…Many studies that assess habitat complexity only focus on a single aspect, most often the density of structural elements (Kovalenko, Thomaz & Warfe, ). Thus, we speculate that a set of factors synergistically influence species composition; for example, trophic interactions and behavior of the species (i.e., intraguild predation, consumptive and nonconsumptive effects, identity of prey and predators, and animal personality, see Polis, 1988; Breviglieri et al., ; Breviglieri & Romero, ; Keiser et al., ) or multiple structural aspects of environment, such as fractal dimensions or cavities (see Tokeshi & Arakaki, ). Therefore, we suggest that future studies evaluate the effect of these different attributes that act as mediators of the composition of terrestrial macroinvertebrates in tropical forests.…”

“…It is known that spiders are generalist predators and are integrated into the food web on the forest floor and can control prey abundance (Lawrence & Wise, ; Lensing, Todd & Wise, ; Sitvarin, Romanchek & Rypstra, ; Wise, ). Consequently, prey may respond to cues of predation risk via activity reduction (Keiser, Ingley, Toscano, Scharf & Pruitt, ; Preisser, Orrock & Schmitz, ; Schmitz, ; Sitvarin et al., ; Yao et al., ), seeking to minimize their encounter rate with predators and thus improve survival (Persons, Walker, Rypstra & Marshall, ). Alternatively, the leaves in the desiccation phases could not be adequately consumed by detritivores, since more time is required for this functional group to have access to this resource (for example, after colonization by bacteria and fungi, see Gessner et al., ).…”