Staudinger Michelle D, Buresch Kendra C, Mäthger Lydia M, Fry Charlie, McAnulty Sarah, Ulmer Kimberly M, Hanlon Roger T
DOI Northeast Climate Science Center, 134 Morrill Science Center, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003-9297;
Biol Bull. 2013 Dec;225(3):161-74. doi: 10.1086/BBLv225n3p161.
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).
我们评估了乌贼（Sepia officinalis）对三种硬骨鱼捕食者的反应：蓝鱼（Pomatomus saltatrix）、夏季比目鱼（Paralichthys dentatus）和黑鲈（Centropristis striata）。我们假设这三种鱼独特的体型、游泳行为和捕食策略会引发乌贼明显不同的反捕食反应。在25次捕食者 - 猎物行为试验过程中，向捕食者展示了乌贼的3种主要防御行为和15种次要防御行为。相比之下，在没有捕食者的对照试验中未展示次要防御行为。对于底栖、坐等型捕食者黑鲈，乌贼采用逃跑策略，并且在水柱中游泳的时间比面对其他捕食者时更多。对于活跃的中上层搜索型捕食者蓝鱼，乌贼与底物保持紧密联系，更多地依赖隐匿行为。惊吓（警示）展示是对黑鲈和蓝鱼最常出现的次要防御行为，特别是黑眼环和警示斑展示。我们无法评估乌贼对伏击型捕食者比目鱼的次要防御行为，因为比目鱼没有追捕或攻击乌贼。尽管如此，在比目鱼试验中乌贼采用了主要防御行为，在隐匿静止和移动行为之间交替。总体而言，我们的结果表明，乌贼在不同硬骨鱼捕食者面前可能会改变其行为：在活跃的搜索型捕食者（如蓝鱼）面前，隐匿行为可能更重要，而在相对久坐、与底部相关的捕食者（如黑鲈）面前，诸如在水柱中游泳和惊吓展示等明显动作可能更普遍。
