Innate response based on visual cues of sympatric and allopatric predators in Nile tilapia.

Predators are an important selective pressure for prey, and responses to visual exposure to non-predators and to allopatric and sympatric predators may assist the understanding of how prey animals recognize and distinguish potential threats. Here, we visually exposed predator-naïve Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) to aquaria with only water (handling-negative control), a non-predator fish (Cyprinus carpio), a South American catfish (Pseudoplatystoma coruscans, allopatric predator), and an African catfish (Clarias gariepinus; sympatric predator). We found that Nile tilapia displayed antipredator responses to both predator catfish but not to non-predator fish or negative control conditions. These antipredator responses, however, were stronger to the sympatric catfish in comparison to the allopatric animal. We concluded that Nile tilapia is able to innately distinguish between a sympatric and an allopatric predator based on visual cues. We assume that the innate recognition of the allopatric predator could be attributed to similarities in the body morphology and movement (key stimuli) of the South American and African catfish. Although this is plausible, the mechanism of the innate allopatric recognition remains unknown and deserves future investigation.

Ventilation responses to predator odors and conspecific chemical alarm cues in the frillfin goby.

The chemical detection of predation risk is direct when based on predator odors, or indirect when an injured conspecific or heterospecific signal it. Physiological adjustments may be necessary in parallel to defensive reactions to cope with an imminent risk. Here, we tested the effects of predator odors and conspecific chemical alarm cues in ventilation response (VR) of frillfin goby, Bathygobius soporator, because this response increases oxygen uptake for supporting behavioral tasks. No VR change was detected in response to odors of predators (catfish) that fed on conspecific, heterospecific fish (tilapia), or were deprived of food and to non-predator (tilapia) that fed chow (non-specific odor control) and odor eluent. The goby's VR, however, increased in response to conspecific alarm cues, but not to heterospecific cues or eluent. Clearly, the VR response in fish depends on the nature of the chemical cue. It is in line with 'threat-sensitive hypothesis' as a chemical cue from an injured prey might mean a foraging predator, whilst the mere presence of a predator odor might not. In addition, because VR can increase, decrease or remains unchanged in response to predation risk in other fish species (including other gobies), we reinforces the species-specific chracteristic of VR responses in fish, regarding the results obtained here for frillfin gobies.