Learn and live: predator experience and feeding history determines prey behaviour and survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining how prey learn the identity of predators and match their vigilance with current levels of threat is central to understanding the dynamics of predator-prey systems and the determinants of fitness. Our study explores how feeding history influences the relative importance of olfactory and visual sensory modes of learning, and how the experience gained through these sensory modes influences behaviour and survival in the field for a juvenile coral reef damselfish. We collected young fish immediately prior to their settlement to benthic habitats. In the laboratory, these predator-naïve fish were exposed to a high- or low-food ration and then conditioned to recognize the olfactory cues (odours) and/or visual cues from two common benthic predators. Fish were then allowed to settle on reefs in the field, and their behaviour and survival over 70 h were recorded. Feeding history strongly influenced their willingness to take risks in the natural environment. Conditioning in the laboratory with visual, olfactory or both cues from predators led fish in the field to display risk-averse behaviour compared with fish conditioned with sea water alone. Well-fed fish that were conditioned with visual, chemical or a combination of predator cues survived eight times better over the first 48 h on reefs than those with no experience of benthic predator cues. This experiment highlights the importance of a flexible and rapid mechanism of learning the identity of predators for survival of young fish during the critical life-history transition between pelagic and benthic habitats.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".