Physiological Stress as a Fundamental Mechanism Linking Predation to Ecosystem Functioning

Hawlena, Dror; Schmitz, Oswald J.

doi:10.1086/656495

Cited by 335 publications

(455 citation statements)

References 133 publications

(128 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

435

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The nutrient demand of an organism is affected by the intensity of its physiological processes, which, among other factors, might depend on its level of stress (Steiner and Van Buskirk 2009; Hawlena and Schmitz 2010b). At a specific level of predation risk, an increase in prey metabolism is one of the most evident physiological traits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At a specific level of predation risk, an increase in prey metabolism is one of the most evident physiological traits. In the short term (i.e., minutes), such a metabolic increase ensures that the prey can be energetically able to avoid or fight its predators (Steiner and Van Buskirk 2009; Hawlena and Schmitz 2010b). On the other hand, if such a metabolic increase is maintained over the long term (i.e., days), the prey is forced to relocate energy from growth or storage to meet the metabolic energy demand.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, if such a metabolic increase is maintained over the long term (i.e., days), the prey is forced to relocate energy from growth or storage to meet the metabolic energy demand. This mechanism may inhibit prey biomass production and nutrient excretion, and, in extreme cases, promote the breakdown of body proteins into glucose (i.e., gluconeogenesis) (Hawlena and Schmitz 2010a,b). Adjustments in the foraging behavior of prey related to resource choice can prevent the deleterious effects of the increase in energy demand induced by predation risk (Hawlena and Schmitz 2010a,b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This mechanism may inhibit prey biomass production and nutrient excretion, and, in extreme cases, promote the breakdown of body proteins into glucose (i.e., gluconeogenesis) (Hawlena and Schmitz 2010a,b). Adjustments in the foraging behavior of prey related to resource choice can prevent the deleterious effects of the increase in energy demand induced by predation risk (Hawlena and Schmitz 2010a,b). Therefore, alterations in the nutrient excretion of prey in response to predation risk might affect rapid nutrient cycling and mineralization through organism ingestion and posterior excretion, while alterations in the resource choices of prey might affect slow nutrient cycling and organic matter left to the detritivore chain (Vanni 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2011a, 2011b). Consequently, it is possible to trace directly an individual prey's stoichiometry plasticity in response to predation risk, which alters the prey's nutrient body and excretion stoichiometry and can reverberate throughout ecosystem‐level processes (Sterner and Elser 2002; Schmitz 2008; Hawlena and Schmitz 2010b; Leroux et al. 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Interactive effects of predation risk and conspecific density on the nutrient stoichiometry of prey

Guariento

Carneiro

Jorge

et al. 2015

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The mere presence of predators (i.e., predation risk) can alter consumer physiology by restricting food intake and inducing stress, which can ultimately affect prey‐mediated ecosystem processes such as nutrient cycling. However, many environmental factors, including conspecific density, can mediate the perception of risk by prey. Prey conspecific density has been defined as a fundamental feature that modulates perceived risk. In this study, we tested the effects of predation risk on prey nutrient stoichiometry (body and excretion). Using a constant predation risk, we also tested the effects of varying conspecific densities on prey responses to predation risk. To answer these questions, we conducted a mesocosm experiment using caged predators (Belostoma sp.), and small bullfrog tadpoles (Lithobates catesbeianus) as prey. We found that L. catesbeianus tadpoles adjust their body nutrient stoichiometry in response to predation risk, which is affected by conspecific density. We also found that the prey exhibited strong morphological responses to predation risk (i.e., an increase in tail muscle mass), which were positively correlated to body nitrogen content. Thus, we pose the notion that in risky situations, adaptive phenotypic responses rather than behavioral ones might partially explain why prey might have a higher nitrogen content under predation risk. In addition, the interactive roles of conspecific density and predation risk, which might result in reduced perceived risk and physiological restrictions in prey, also affected how prey stoichiometry responded to the fear of predation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Interactive effects of predation risk and conspecific density on the nutrient stoichiometry of prey

Guariento

Carneiro

Jorge

et al. 2015

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Do wild carnivores forage for prey or for nutrients?

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A widespread perception is that carnivores are limited by the amount of prey that can be captured rather than their nutritional quality, and thus have no need to regulate macronutrient balance. Contrary to this view, recent laboratory studies show macronutrient-specific food selection by both invertebrate and vertebrate predators, and in some cases also associated performance benefits. The question thus arises of whether wild predators might likewise feed selectively according to the macronutrient content of prey. Here we review laboratory studies demonstrating the regulation of macronutrient intake by invertebrate and vertebrate predators, and address the question of whether this is likely to also occur in the wild. We conclude that it is highly likely that wild predators select prey or selectively feed on body parts according to their macronutrient composition, a possibility that could have significant implications for ecological and foraging theory, as well as applied wildlife conservation and management.

show abstract

Interactive abiotic and biotic stressor impacts on a stream‐dwelling amphibian

Coyle,

Vredenburg,

Stillman

2024

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organisms within freshwater and marine environments are subject to a diverse range of often co‐occurring abiotic and biotic stressors. Despite growing awareness of the complex multistress systems at play in aquatic ecosystems, many questions remain regarding how simultaneous stressors interact with one another and jointly impact aquatic species. We looked at multistress interactions in a protected stream ecosystem in Mendocino County, California. Specifically, we examined how diurnal temperature variation, turbidity, and predator cues altered the movement speed of larval Pacific giant salamanders (Dicamptodon tenebrosus). In a second experiment, we looked at how simulated low‐flow summer conditions impact the expression of heat‐shock proteins (HSPs) in the same species. Larvae moved almost one and a half times faster in the presence of chemical cues from trout and suspended sediment, and almost two times faster when both sediment and trout cues were present but were only marginally affected by temperature and visual cues from conspecifics. Interestingly, the order of stressor exposure also appeared to influence larval speed, where exposure to sediment and trout in earlier trials tended to lead to faster speeds in later trials. Additionally, larvae exposed to low‐flow conditions had more variable, but not statistically significantly higher, expression of HSPs. Our findings highlight the potential interactive effects of an abiotic stressor, sedimentation, and a biotic stressor, and predator chemical cues on an ecologically important trait: movement speed. Our findings also demonstrate the likely role of HSPs in larval salamander survival in challenging summer conditions. Taken together, these findings show that larval D. tenebrosus responds behaviorally to biotic and abiotic stressors and suggests a possible pathway for physiological tolerance of environmental stress. Consideration of multistress systems and their effects is important for understanding the full effects of co‐occurring stressors on aquatic organisms to guide appropriate conservation and management efforts based on ecologically relevant responses of organisms within an environment.

show abstract

Physiological Stress as a Fundamental Mechanism Linking Predation to Ecosystem Functioning

Cited by 335 publications

References 133 publications

Interactive effects of predation risk and conspecific density on the nutrient stoichiometry of prey

Interactive effects of predation risk and conspecific density on the nutrient stoichiometry of prey

Do wild carnivores forage for prey or for nutrients?

Interactive abiotic and biotic stressor impacts on a stream‐dwelling amphibian

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About