Why is cannibalism so rare among cultured larvae and juveniles of Pangasius djambal? Morphological, behavioural and energetic answers

Baras, Étienne; Hafsaridewi, Rani; Slembrouck, Jacques; Priyadi, Agus; Moreau, Yann; Pouyaud, Laurent; Legendre, Marc

doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2010.04.004

Cited by 24 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In these circumstances, cannibals might trade off immediate energy return against capture success and risk of retaliation, thereby giving preference to relatively small prey. Similar preferences for small prey size have been observed in cannibalistic Pangasius djambal in similar experimental conditions (Baras et al 2010a). Hence, the curves in Figure 2 can probably not be used to predict prey size preference of young P. punctifer in the wild.…”

Section: Morphological Constraints On Cannibalism and Prey Size Prefementioning

confidence: 60%

“…The design of predation experiments in this study was almost replicated from Baras et al (2010a). All predation experiments took place in cages immersed at 90% in an independent water recirculating system where temperature was maintained at 28.5 ± 0.2…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Baras et al 2010a), except on some occasions (n = 0-5 prey) so as to document the relationships between growth and food intake over a broader range. The latter situations were not retained in the analyses of prey size preference.…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The identification of missing prey was straightforward when SL was measured, as this dimension did not vary in fish deprived of food over 24 h. By contrast, WM decreased during this interval, thereby requiring a two-step back-calculation protocol for the identification of eaten prey: (1) the WM of prey fish after 24 h of food deprivation was estimated by subtracting from the initial WM the weight loss that was measured in the control group; (2) missing cases in the actual final distribution of WM were moved by successive iterations, in order to determine (with simple linear regression tests) the best fit (i.e. the combination with the highest r 2 and a slope of 1.00; further details in Baras et al 2010a).…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is frequent that cannibals do not prefer consuming prey as large as possible, as these prey might not guarantee the highest energy return, because of lower capture success, longer handling time or greater risk of retaliation (synthesis in Baras and Jobling 2002). As for predation capacities, prey size preferences can vary substantially during the ontogeny (Hecht and Appelbaum 1988;Folkvord and Otterå 1993;Baras 1999;Baras et al 2010a). Any further prediction of the risk of cannibalism requires estimating how many fish are cannibalised per unit of time, and for how long cannibals will continue preying upon the stock.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

How many meals a day to minimize cannibalism when rearing larvae of the Amazonian catfishPseudoplatystoma punctifer? The cannibal’s point of view

Baras

Aguila

Naranjos

et al. 2011

Aquat. Living Resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Meal frequency is a key parameter in fish larviculture, especially in highly cannibalistic species. Knowledge of the biological bases of cannibalism (growth capacity of cannibals, morphological constraints on cannibalism, prey size preference) can help predicting the risks of cannibalism for different feeding schedules under culture conditions. This study relied on the day-by-day analysis of prey size preference and bioenergetics of individual cannibals of the catfish Pseudoplatystoma punctifer (8-65 mm standard length, SL, 0.5-400 mg dry mass, DM) at 28.5• C under 12L:12D. The results were equated with the ontogenetic variations of morphological factors (head and mouth width) and feed efficiency of larvae feeding on Artemia nauplii, in order to calculate the risks of cannibalism among fish fed 2-7 daily meals. The predation capacities of P. punctifer were highest at 8 mm SL and decreased in larger fish (largest prey = 86% and 70% SL in fish of 8 and >30 mm SL, respectively). Cannibals of increasing size preferred increasingly smaller prey relative to their own size, but also to their predation capacities. These morphological and behavioural constraints were largely compensated for by bioenergetics performance. Cannibals consumed high daily food rations (as high as 171 and 29% DM in fish <1 and >300 mg DM, respectively), exhibited high gross conversion efficiencies (0.50-0.55 and about 0.70, in fish <1 and >30 mg DM, respectively), and grew rapidly (90 and 18% DM day −1 in fish <1 and >300 mg DM, respectively). The growth advantage of cannibals over siblings fed Artemia nauplii was decisive, except for high meal frequencies (6-7 daily meals). This study supports the view that the risk of cannibalism and adequate feeding strategies can be largely predicted in a particular fish species if the morphological, behavioural and bioenergetics bases of cannibalism are examined altogether in an ontogenetic perspective.

show abstract

Section: Morphological Constraints On Cannibalism and Prey Size Prefementioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

How many meals a day to minimize cannibalism when rearing larvae of the Amazonian catfishPseudoplatystoma punctifer? The cannibal’s point of view

Baras

Aguila

Naranjos

et al. 2011

Aquat. Living Resour.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Resource competition explains rare cannibalism in the wild in livebearing fishes

Riesch

Araújo

Bumgarner

et al. 2022

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cannibalism, the act of preying on and consuming a conspecific, is taxonomically widespread, and putatively important in the wild, particularly in teleost fishes. Nonetheless, most studies of cannibalism in fishes have been performed in the laboratory. Here, we test four predictions for the evolution of cannibalism by conducting one of the largest assessments of cannibalism in the wild to date coupled with a mesocosm experiment. Focusing on mosquitofishes and guppies, we examined 17 species (11,946 individuals) across 189 populations in the wild, spanning both native and invasive ranges and including disparate types of habitats. We found cannibalism to be quite rare in the wild: most populations and species showed no evidence of cannibalism, and the prevalence of cannibalism was typically less than 5% within populations when it occurred. Most victims were juveniles (94%; only half of these appeared to have been newborn offspring), with the remaining 6% of victims being adult males. Females exhibited more cannibalism than males, but this was only partially explained by their larger body size, suggesting greater energetic requirements of reproduction likely play a role as well. We found no evidence that dispersal‐limited environments had a lower prevalence of cannibalism, but prevalence was greater in populations with higher conspecific densities, suggesting that more intense resource competition drives cannibalistic behavior. Supporting this conclusion, our mesocosm experiment revealed that cannibalism prevalence increased with higher conspecific density and lower resource levels but was not associated with juvenile density or strongly influenced by predation risk. We suggest that cannibalism in livebearing fishes is rare in the wild because preying on conspecifics is energetically costly and only becomes worth the effort when competition for other food is intense. Due to the artificially reduced cost of capturing conspecifics within confined spaces, cannibalism in captive settings can be much more frequent.

show abstract

Non-native species in reservoirs: how are we doing in Brazil?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why is cannibalism so rare among cultured larvae and juveniles of Pangasius djambal? Morphological, behavioural and energetic answers

Cited by 24 publications

References 39 publications

How many meals a day to minimize cannibalism when rearing larvae of the Amazonian catfishPseudoplatystoma punctifer? The cannibal’s point of view

How many meals a day to minimize cannibalism when rearing larvae of the Amazonian catfishPseudoplatystoma punctifer? The cannibal’s point of view

Resource competition explains rare cannibalism in the wild in livebearing fishes

Non-native species in reservoirs: how are we doing in Brazil?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About