dc.contributorNorth Carolina State University
dc.contributorAppalachian State University
dc.contributorUniversity of London
dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.contributorWake Forest University
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-25T10:27:03Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-19T22:13:19Z
dc.date.available2021-06-25T10:27:03Z
dc.date.available2022-12-19T22:13:19Z
dc.date.created2021-06-25T10:27:03Z
dc.date.issued2021-03-18
dc.identifierFrontiers in Ecology and Evolution, v. 8.
dc.identifier2296-701X
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/206129
dc.identifier10.3389/fevo.2020.603387
dc.identifier2-s2.0-85103476880
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/5386726
dc.description.abstractSome prey are exceptionally difficult to digest, and yet even non-specialized animals may consume them—why? Durophagy, the consumption of hard-shelled prey, is thought to require special adaptations for crushing or digesting the hard shells to avoid the many potential costs of this prey type. But many animals lacking specializations nevertheless include hard-bodied prey in their diets. We describe several non-mutually exclusive adaptive mechanisms that could explain such a pattern, and point to optimal foraging and compensatory growth as potentially having widespread importance in explaining costly-prey consumption. We first conducted a literature survey to quantify the regularity with which non-specialized teleost fishes consume hard-shelled prey: stomach-content data from 325 teleost fish species spanning 82 families (57,233 stomach samples) demonstrated that non-specialized species comprise ~75% of the total species exhibiting durophagy, commonly consuming hard-shelled prey at low to moderate levels (~10–40% as much as specialists). We then performed a diet survey to assess the frequency of molluscivory across the native latitudinal range of a small livebearing fish, Gambusia holbrooki, lacking durophagy specializations. Molluscivory was regionally widespread, spanning their entire native latitudinal range (>14° latitude). Third, we tested for a higher frequency of molluscivory under conditions of higher intraspecific resource competition in Bahamian mosquitofish (Gambusia spp.). Examining over 5,300 individuals, we found that molluscivory was more common in populations with higher population density, suggesting that food limitation is important in eliciting molluscivory. Finally, we experimentally tested in G. holbrooki whether molluscivory reduces growth rate and whether compensatory growth follows a period of molluscivory. We found that consumption of hard-shelled gastropods results in significantly reduced growth rate, but compensatory growth following prior snail consumption can quickly mitigate growth costs. Our results suggest that the widespread phenomenon of costly-prey consumption may be partially explained by its relative benefits when few alternative prey options exist, combined with compensatory growth that alleviates temporary costs.
dc.languageeng
dc.relationFrontiers in Ecology and Evolution
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectdurophagy
dc.subjectfood web
dc.subjectgrowth compensation
dc.subjectniche partitioning
dc.subjectpredator-prey interactions
dc.subjectprey choice
dc.subjectresource competition
dc.subjecttrophic ecology
dc.titleConsuming Costly Prey: Optimal Foraging and the Role of Compensatory Growth
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución