Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides Choking on Prey

Wanjala, B.; Tash, Jerry C.

doi:10.2307/3670808

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some prey are risky to eat, as defensive structures of prey (e.g., spines, thorns, claws) may injure or kill a predator during ingestion (Jordan 1907: 51, Munro 1930, Orr 1937, Holdom 1945, Mylne 1957, Wick and Rodgers 1957, Houck 1961, Tomkins 1963, Cooper 1969, Morejohn 1969, Lingle 1976, Mock andMock 1980, Wanjala andTash 1983). But predators may counter these defenses with a variety of handling behaviours (e.g., dismemberment, crushing, stabbing) which serve to kill or incapacitate prey (Recher andRecher 1968, Riegner 1982).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prey Defences and Predator Handling Behaviour: The Dangerous Prey Hypothesis

Forbes¹

1989

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. . Wiley-Blackwell and Nordic Society Oikos are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Oikos. Forbes, L. S. 1989. Prey defences and predator handling behaviour: the dangerous prey hypothesis. -Oikos 55: 155-158.Ictalurid catfish possess locking spines which make them dangerous to gape-limited predators such as herons and grebes, but not to ospreys (Pandion haliaetus) which dismember prey. Herons and grebes handled ictalurids longer than prey without locking spines, but ospreys did not. As well, herons and grebes took ictalurids less frequently than ospreys. These observations are consistent with the hypothesis that prey handling is a function of the risk of injury during ingestion. Minimization of this risk may not be a constraint, but rather a foraging decision for a predator.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prey Defences and Predator Handling Behaviour: The Dangerous Prey Hypothesis

Forbes¹

1989

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wright (2009) has shown that the largemouth bass is physiologically vulnerable to injections of tadpole madtom venom, and we have obtained similar results in our own laboratory. Although it is a large-mouthed species capable of using a variety of behaviors (Nyberg 197 1, Winemiller and Taylor 1987) to feed on a wide range of prey (Hodgson and Kitchell(1987), the largemouth bass is known on occasion to select prey too large to swallow (Wanjala and Tash 1983). A previous assessment of the vulnerability of various prey species to largemouth bass (Lewis and Helms 1964) included the black bullhead (Ameiurus melas), which is equipped with locking spines similar to those of the tadpole madtom.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Response of a Piscivore (Micropterus salmoides) to a Venomous Prey Species (Noturus gyrinus)

Emmett

Cochran

2010

Journal of Freshwater Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Selection pressure for prey to retaliate is strong (Dawkins & Krebs, 1979), and many species may do so effectively. For example, prey animals are known to inflict serious or even fatal injuries on predators, ranging from lions and tigers (Schaller, 1967, 1972) to birds (Morejohn, 1969; Mock & Mock, 1980), snakes (Fleay, 1981; Webb & Shine, 1993a), fishes (Rubinoff & Kropach, 1970; Wanjala & Tash, 1983), spiders (Edmunds, 1974), insects (Lucas & Brockmann, 1981), and gastropods (Dietl, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dangerous food: lacking venom and constriction, how do snake-like lizards (Lialis burtonis, Pygopodidae) subdue their lizard prey?

Wall

Shine

2007

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Snakes are renowned for their ability to subdue and swallow large, often dangerous prey animals. Numerous adaptations, including constriction, venom, and a strike-and-release feeding strategy, help them avoid injury during predatory encounters. Burton's legless lizard ( Lialis burtonis Gray, Pygopodidae) has converged strongly on snakes. It is functionally limbless and feeds at infrequent intervals on relatively large prey items (other lizards) capable of inflicting a damaging bite. However, L. burtonis possesses neither venom glands, nor the ability to constrict prey. We investigated how L. burtonis subdues its prey without suffering serious retaliatory bites. Experiments showed that lizards modified their strike precision according to prey size; very large prey were always struck on the head or neck, preventing them from biting. In addition, L. burtonis delayed swallowing large lizards until they were incapacitated, whereas smaller prey were usually swallowed while still struggling. Lialis burtonis also displays morphological adaptations protecting it from prey retaliation. Its long snout prevents prey from biting, and it can retract its lidless eyes out of harm's way while holding onto a food item. The present study further clarifies the remarkable convergence between snakes and L. burtonis , and highlights the importance of prey retaliatory potential in predator evolution.

show abstract

Largemouth Bass Micropterus salmoides Choking on Prey

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Prey Defences and Predator Handling Behaviour: The Dangerous Prey Hypothesis

Prey Defences and Predator Handling Behaviour: The Dangerous Prey Hypothesis

The Response of a Piscivore (Micropterus salmoides) to a Venomous Prey Species (Noturus gyrinus)

Dangerous food: lacking venom and constriction, how do snake-like lizards (Lialis burtonis, Pygopodidae) subdue their lizard prey?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About