• Login
    About WHOAS
    View Item 
    •   WHOAS Home
    • Marine Biological Laboratory
    • Program in Sensory Physiology and Behavior
    • View Item
    •   WHOAS Home
    • Marine Biological Laboratory
    • Program in Sensory Physiology and Behavior
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of WHOASCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesKeywordsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesKeywords

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    Defensive responses of cuttlefish to different teleost predators

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    161.full.pdf (1.520Mb)
    Date
    2013-12-01
    Author
    Staudinger, Michelle D.  Concept link
    Buresch, Kendra C.  Concept link
    Mathger, Lydia M.  Concept link
    Fry, Charlie  Concept link
    McAnulty, Sarah  Concept link
    Ulmer, Kimberly M.  Concept link
    Hanlon, Roger T.  Concept link
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citable URI
    https://hdl.handle.net/1912/6401
    As published
    https://doi.org/10.1086/BBLv225n3p161
    DOI
    10.1086/BBLv225n3p161
    Abstract
    We evaluated cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis) responses to three teleost predators: bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix), summer flounder (Paralichthys dentatus), and black seabass (Centropristis striata). We hypothesized that the distinct body shapes, swimming behaviors, and predation tactics exhibited by the three fishes would elicit markedly different antipredator responses by cuttlefish. Over the course of 25 predator-prey behavioral trials, 3 primary and 15 secondary defense behaviors of cuttlefish were shown to predators. In contrast, secondary defenses were not shown during control trials in which predators were absent. With seabass—a benthic, sit-and-pursue predator—cuttlefish used flight and spent more time swimming in the water column than with other predators. With bluefish—an active, pelagic searching predator—cuttlefish remained closely associated with the substrate and relied more on cryptic behaviors. Startle (deimatic) displays were the most frequent secondary defense shown to seabass and bluefish, particularly the Dark eye ring and Deimatic spot displays. We were unable to evaluate secondary defenses by cuttlefish to flounder—a lie-and-wait predator—because flounder did not pursue cuttlefish or make attacks. Nonetheless, cuttlefish used primary defense during flounder trials, alternating between cryptic still and moving behaviors. Overall, our results suggest that cuttlefish may vary their behavior in the presence of different teleost predators: cryptic behaviors may be more important in the presence of active searching predators (e.g., bluefish), while conspicuous movements such as swimming in the water column and startle displays may be more prevalent with relatively sedentary, bottom-associated predators (e.g., seabass).
    Description
    Author Posting. © Marine Biological Laboratory, 2013. This article is posted here by permission of Marine Biological Laboratory for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Biological Bulletin 225 (2013): 161-174.
    Collections
    • Program in Sensory Physiology and Behavior
    Suggested Citation
    Biological Bulletin 225 (2013): 161-174
     
    All Items in WHOAS are protected by original copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. WHOAS also supports the use of the Creative Commons licenses for original content.
    A service of the MBLWHOI Library | About WHOAS
    Contact Us | Send Feedback | Privacy Policy
    Core Trust Logo