Predator–prey naïveté, antipredator behavior,and the ecology of predator invasions

We present a framework for explaining variation in predator invasion success and predator impacts on native prey that integrates information about predator–prey naïveté, predator and prey behavioral responses to each other, consumptive and non‐consumptive effects of predators on prey, and interacting effects of multiple species interactions. We begin with the ‘naïve prey’ hypothesis that posits that naïve, native prey that lack evolutionary history with non‐native predators suffer heavy predation because they exhibit ineffective antipredator responses to novel predators. Not all naïve prey, however, show ineffective antipredator responses to novel predators. To explain variation in prey response to novel predators, we focus on the interaction between prey use of general versus specific cues and responses, and the functional similarity of non‐native and native predators. Effective antipredator responses reduce predation rates (reduce consumptive effects of predators, CEs), but often also carry costs that result in non‐consumptive effects (NCEs) of predators. We contrast expected CEs versus NCEs for non‐native versus native predators, and discuss how differences in the relative magnitudes of CEs and NCEs might influence invasion dynamics. Going beyond the effects of naïve prey, we discuss how the ‘naïve prey’, ‘enemy release’ and ‘evolution of increased competitive ability’ (EICA) hypotheses are inter‐related, and how the importance of all three might be mediated by prey and predator naïveté. These ideas hinge on the notion that non‐native predators enjoy a ‘novelty advantage’ associated with the naïveté of native prey and top predators. However, non‐native predators could instead suffer from a novelty disadvantage because they are also naïve to their new prey and potential predators. We hypothesize that patterns of community similarity and evolution might explain the variation in novelty advantage that can underlie variation in invasion outcomes. Finally, we discuss management implications of our framework, including suggestions for managing invasive predators, predator reintroductions and biological control.     

Overcoming prey naiveté: Free‐living marsupials develop recognition and effective behavioral responses to alien predators in Australia

Naiveté in prey arises from novel ecological mismatches in cue recognition systems and antipredator responses following the arrival of alien predators. The multilevel naiveté framework suggests that animals can progress through levels of naiveté toward predator awareness. Alternatively, native prey may be preadapted to recognize novel predators via common constituents in predator odors or familiar predator archetypes. We tested predictions of these competing hypotheses on the mechanisms driving behavioral responses of native species to alien predators by measuring responses of native free‐living northern brown bandicoots (Isoodon macrourus) to alien red fox (Vulpes vulpes) odor. We compared multiple bandicoot populations either sympatric or allopatric with foxes. Bandicoots sympatric with foxes showed recognition and appropriate antipredator behavior toward fox odor via avoidance. On the few occasions bandicoots did visit, their vigilance significantly increased, and their foraging decreased. In contrast, bandicoots allopatric with foxes showed no recognition of this predator cue. Our results suggest that vulnerable Australian mammals were likely naïve to foxes when they first arrived, which explains why so many native mammals declined soon after fox arrival. Our results also suggest such naiveté can be overcome within a relatively short time frame, driven by experience with predators, thus supporting the multilevel naiveté framework.     

Recognition and Response to Native and Novel Predators in the Largespring mosquitofish,Gambusia geiseri

The introduction of predator species into new habitats is an increasingly common consequence of human activities, and the persistence of native prey species depends upon their response to these novel predators. In this study, we examined whether the Largespring mosquitofish, Gambusia geiseri exhibited antipredator behavior and/or an elevation of circulating stress hormones (cortisol) to visual and chemical cues from a native predator, a novel predator, or a non‐predatory control fish. Prey showed the most pronounced antipredator response to the native predator treatment, by moving away from the stimulus, while the prey showed no significant changes in their vertical or horizontal position in response to the novel or non‐predator treatments. We also found no significant difference in water‐borne cortisol release rates following any of the treatments. Our results suggest the prey did not recognize and exhibit antipredator behavior to the novel predator, and we infer that this predator species could be detrimental if it expands into the range of this prey species. Further, our study demonstrates prey may not respond to an invasive predator that is phylogenetically, behaviorally, and morphologically dissimilar from the prey species' native predators.     

Naïve,bold, or just hungry? An invasive exotic prey species recognises but does not respond to its predators

Alien species experience both costs and benefits in invaded environments, through naiveté of potential prey species, but also predation pressure from native predators. The question of whether alien prey recognise and respond to native predators has been relatively understudied, despite the hypothesised potential for native predators to provide biotic resistance to invasion. There are two main hypotheses about whether exotic prey should recognise native and exotic predators in their new ranges: (1) naiveté—predicting recognition of evolutionarily familiar predators only, and (2) pre-adaptation—predicting recognition of all predators through a generalist recognition template. With regards to antipredator responses, (3) naïveté theory presumes that exotic prey will respond to the predators they recognise, but we suggest that (4) a bold behavioural syndrome, and/or a high marginal value of food in invaded environments might result in weak or absent responses, even to recognised predators. Here we combine the giving-up density framework with behavioural analysis of remote camera footage to experimentally test these ideas in a disturbed, peri-urban, Australian ecosystem, where alien black rats are predated on by alien dogs, foxes, cats, and native quolls. Black rats recognised dogs and foxes, but appear naïve towards quolls. However, they showed no antipredator responses at all, consistent with a bold behavioural syndrome, elevated predation risk, and/or a high marginal value of food in invaded environments.     

Predator‐Naïve Brown Trout (Salmo trutta) Show Antipredator Behaviours to Scent from an Introduced Piscivorous Mammalian Predator Fed Conspecifics

Introduced mammalian predators may pose a high risk for native and naïve prey populations, but little is known about how native fish species may recognize and respond to scents from introduced mammalian predators. We investigated the role of diet‐released chemical cues in facilitating predator recognition, hypothesizing that native brown trout (Salmo trutta) would exhibit antipredator behaviours to faeces scents from the introduced American mink (Neovision vison) fed conspecifics, but not to non‐trout diets. In treatments‐control and replicate stream tank experiments, brown trout showed significant antipredator responses to faeces scent from mink fed conspecifics, but not to faeces scent from mink fed a non‐trout diet (chicken), or the non‐predator food control, Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber). We conclude that native and naïve brown trout show relevant antipredator behaviours to an introduced mammalian predator, presumably based on diet‐released conspecific alarm cues and thereby estimate the predation risk.     

Naiveté is not forever: responses of a vulnerable native rodent to its long term alien predators

Alien predators have wreaked havoc on isolated endemic and island fauna worldwide, a phenomenon generally attributed to prey naiveté, or a failure to display effective antipredator behaviour due to a lack of experience. While the failure to recognise and/or respond to a novel predator has devastating impacts in the short term after predators are introduced, few studies have asked whether medium to long term experience with alien predators enables native species to overcome their naiveté. In Australia, introduced dogs Canis lupus familiaris, foxes Vulpes vulpes and cats Felis catus have caused rapid extinctions and declines in small–medium sized native mammals since they were introduced ～150 years ago. However, native wildlife have had ～4000 years experience with another dog – the dingo Canis lupus dingo. Native bush rats Rattus fuscipes remain common despite predation from these predators. We predicted that prior experience with dingoes would mean that bush rats recognise and respond to dogs, but suspect that hundreds of years experience may not be enough for effective responses to cats and foxes. To test these predictions, we combined the giving‐up density (GUD) with analysis of remote camera footage to measure bush rat foraging and behavioural responses to body odour from dogs, foxes, cats and native spotted‐tail quolls Dasyurus maculatus. Bush rats responded strongly to dogs with increased GUDs, increased vigilance and decreased foraging. However, mixed responses to foxes and cats suggest that at least some individuals remain naïve towards these predators. Naiveté is not necessarily forever: alien predators devastate many native prey species, but others may learn or adapt to the new threat.     

Naïveté in novel ecological interactions: lessons from theory and experimental evidence

The invasion of alien species into areas beyond their native ranges is having profound effects on ecosystems around the world. In particular, novel alien predators are causing rapid extinctions or declines in many native prey species, and these impacts are generally attributed to ecological naïveté or the failure to recognise a novel enemy and respond appropriately due to a lack of experience. Despite a large body of research concerning the recognition of alien predation risk by native prey, the literature lacks an extensive review of naïveté theory that specifically asks how naïveté between novel pairings of alien predators and native prey disrupts our classical understanding of predator–prey ecological theory. Here we critically review both classic and current theory relating to predator–prey interactions between both predators and prey with shared evolutionary histories, and those that are ecologically ‘mismatched’ through the outcomes of biological invasions. The review is structured around the multiple levels of naïveté framework of Banks & Dickman (2007), and concepts and examples are discussed as they relate to each stage in the process from failure to recognise a novel predator (Level 1 naïveté), through to appropriate (Level 2) and effective (Level 3) antipredator responses. We discuss the relative contributions of recognition, cue types and the implied risk of cues used by novel alien and familiar native predators, to the probability that prey will recognise a novel predator. We then cover the antipredator response types available to prey and the factors that predict whether these responses will be appropriate or effective against novel alien and familiar native predators. In general, the level of naïveté of native prey can be predicted by the degree of novelty (in terms of appearance, behaviour or habitat use) of the alien predator compared to native predators with which prey are experienced. Appearance in this sense includes cue types, spatial distribution and implied risk of cues, whilst behaviour and habitat use include hunting modes and the habitat domain of the predator. Finally, we discuss whether the antipredator response can occur without recognition per se, for example in the case of morphological defences, and then consider a potential extension of the multiple levels of naïveté framework. The review concludes with recommendations for the design and execution of naïveté experiments incorporating the key concepts and issues covered here. This review aims to critique and combine classic ideas about predator–prey interactions with current naïveté theory, to further develop the multiple levels of naïveté framework, and to suggest the most fruitful avenues for future research.     

Predator Generalization Decreases the Effect of Introduced Predators in the San Marcos Salamander,Eurycea nana

The introduction of novel predators into an environment can have detrimental consequences on prey species, especially if these species lack the ability to recognize these predators. One such species that may be negatively affected by introduced predators is the federally threatened San Marcos salamander (Eurycea nana). Previous research found that predator‐naïve (captive‐hatched) salamanders showed decreased activity in response to the chemical cues of both a native fish predator (Micropterus salmoides) and an introduced fish predator (Lepomis auritus), but not to a non‐predatory fish (Gambusia geiseri). We tested the hypothesis that E. nana recognized the introduced Lepomis (and other non‐native Lepomis) because they share chemical cues with other native congeneric Lepomis predators in the San Marcos River. We examined the antipredator response of predator‐naïve E. nana to chemical cues from (1) a sympatric native sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus; Perciformes: Centrarchidae); (2) a sympatric introduced sunfish (L. auritus); (3) an allopatric sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus); (4) a sympatric non‐native, non‐centrarchid cichlid (Herichthys cyanoguttatum; Perciformes: Cichlidae); and (5) a blank water control to determine whether individuals make generalizations about novel predators within a genus and across a family. Exposure to chemical cues from all fish predator treatments caused a reduction in salamander activity (antipredator response). Additionally, there were no differences in the antipredator responses to each predatory fish treatment. The similar responses to all sunfish treatments indicate that E. nana shows predator generalization in response to novel predators that are similar to recognized predators. Additionally, the antipredator response to H. cyanoguttatum indicates that predator generalization can occur among perciform families.     

Prey naivety in the behavioural responses of juvenile Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) to an invasive predator

1. Non‐native predators might inflict proportionally higher mortality on prey that have no previous experience of them, compared to species that have coexisted with the predator for some time. 2. We tested whether juvenile Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) were less able to recognise a non‐native than a native predator, by investigating behavioural responses to the chemical cues of the invasive smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) and the native northern pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis) in both laboratory and field experiments. 3. Laboratory results demonstrated strong innate antipredator responses of individual juvenile Chinook salmon to northern pikeminnow; fish spent 70% of time motionless and exhibited 100% greater panic response than in controls. By contrast, antipredator responses to the chemical cues of smallmouth bass did not differ from controls. 4. These results were supported by similar differences in recognition of these predator odours by groups of juvenile Chinook salmon in fully natural conditions, though responses reflected a greater range of antipredator behaviours by individuals. In field trials, responses to northern pikeminnow odour resulted in increased flight or absence, reductions in swimming and foraging, and increased time spent near the substratum, compared to smallmouth bass odour. 5. Given that survival of juvenile fish is facilitated by predator recognition, our results support the hypothesis that naivety may be an important factor determining the effect of non‐native predators on prey populations. Efforts to manage the effect of native and non‐native predators may benefit by considering complex behavioural interactions, such as these at the individual and group levels.     

Exploratory behaviour and novel predator recognition: behavioural correlations across contexts

It was hypothesized that the exploratory behaviour of an individual measured in a novel environment could predict its behaviour in response to a novel predator. This study examined novel predator recognition in the western mosquitofish Gambusia affinis, a species with individual differences in risk‐taking, activity and exploration in novel environments. Prey responded with characteristic shoaling and avoidance in response to native predators, but did not show characteristic antipredator behaviour towards novel predators. Furthermore, G. affinis exhibited individual‐level behavioural correlations across contexts but only when prey were tested with native predators. This could be the result of native predatory selection on behavioural correlations in the prey species.     

Naiveté and an aquatic-terrestrial dichotomy in the effects of introduced predators

There is much evidence that suggests that freshwater systems are more sensitive to introduced predators than are terrestrial or marine systems. We argue here that this dichotomy reflects widespread naiveté toward introduced predators among freshwater prey. Continental terrestrial animals are seldom naive toward novel predators owing to the homogenizing effects of historical biotic interchanges. Comparable biotic interchanges might have also precluded prey naiveté in most marine systems. By contrast, freshwater systems exhibit persistent large- and small-scale heterogeneity in predation regimes. This heterogeneity promotes naiveté at multiple spatial scales in freshwater prey, thereby producing a systemic vulnerability to introduced predators that is not seen in continental terrestrial or marine systems.     

Interspecific differences in antipredator strategies determine the strength of non‐consumptive predator effects on stream detritivores

Animal species differ considerably in their response to predation risks. Interspecific variability in prey behaviour and morphology can alter cascading effects of predators on ecosystem structure and functioning. We tested whether species‐specific morphological defenses may affect responses of leaf litter consuming invertebrate prey to sit‐and‐wait predators, the odonate Cordulegaster boltonii larvae, in aquatic food webs. Partly or completely blocking the predator mouthparts (mandibles and/or extensible labium), thus eliminating consumptive (i.e. lethal) predator effects, we created a gradient of predator‐prey interaction intensities (no predator < predator – no attack < predator – non‐lethal attacks < lethal predator). A field experiment was first used to assess both consumptive and non‐consumptive predator effects on leaf litter decomposition and prey abundances. Laboratory microcosms were then used to examine behavioural responses of armored and non‐armored prey to predation risk and their consequences on litter decomposition. Results show that armored and non‐armored prey responded to both acute (predator – non‐lethal attacks) and chronic (predator – no attack) predation risks. Acute predation risk had stronger effects on litter decomposition, prey feeding rate and prey habitat use than predator presence alone (chronic predation risk). Predator presence induced a reduction in feeding activity (i.e. resource consumption) of both prey types but a shift to predator‐free habitat patches in non‐armored detritivores only. Non‐consumptive predator effects on prey subsequently decreased litter decomposition rate. Species‐specific prey morphological defenses and behaviour should thus be considered when studying non‐consumptive predator effects on prey community structure and ecosystem functioning.     

Behavioral responses of American toad and bullfrog tadpoles to the presence of cues from the invasive fish, Gambusia affinis

The introduction of non-native predators is thought to have important negative effects on native prey populations. The susceptibility of native prey to non-native or introduced predators may depend on their ability to respond appropriately to the presence of these non-native predators. We conducted a laboratory based behavioral experiment to examine the response of American toad (Bufo americanus) and bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana) tadpoles to the presence of cues from the introduced mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), a potential tadpole predator. Neither the American toad tadpoles nor the bullfrog tadpoles responded behaviorally to the presence of mosquitofish cues. If tadpoles are unable to respond to the presence of mosquitofish cues appropriately, then their ability to avoid predation by mosquitofish may be compromised and this may contribute to the impacts of mosquitofish on some tadpole populations.     

Recognition of non-native peacock bass, <Emphasis Type="Italic">Cichla kelberi</Emphasis> by native prey: testing the naiveté hypothesis

Prey naiveté is proposed as one of the main reasons behind species extinctions attributed to invasive predators. This study examined whether the naiveté hypothesis could explain extinctions after the introduction of peacock bass (Cichla kelberi) in Paraná River, Brazil. Our results show that prey responded to both visual and chemical cues of peacock bass. Displayed avoidance behaviors were equal to or greater than those observed with a native predator, Hoplias malabaricus. We conclude that lack of recognition was not responsible for the observed vulnerability of native species to this introduced predator. Finally, we discuss implications of these findings for the native biodiversity and convene other potential explanations for the observed effects of peacock bass on native prey.     

Predation Risk Avoidance by Terrestrial Amphibians: The Role of Prey Experience and Vulnerability to Native and Exotic Predators

We studied avoidance, by four amphibian prey species (Rana luteiventris, Ambystoma macrodactylum, Pseudacris regilla, Tarichia granulosa), of chemical cues associated with native garter snake (Thamnophis elegans) or exotic bullfrog (R. catesbeiana) predators. We predicted that avoidance of native predators would be most pronounced, and that prey species would differ in the intensity of their avoidance based on relative levels of vulnerability to predators in the wild. Adult R. luteiventris (presumably high vulnerability to predation) showed significant avoidance of chemical cues from both predators, A. macrodactylum (intermediate vulnerability to predation) avoided T. elegans only, while P. regilla (intermediate vulnerability to predation) and T. granulosa (low vulnerability to predation) showed no avoidance of either predator. We assessed if predator avoidance was innate and/or learned by testing responses of prey having disparate levels of prior exposure to predators. Wild‐caught (presumably predator‐exposed) post‐metamorphic juvenile R. luteiventris and P. regilla avoided T. elegans cues, while laboratory‐reared (predator‐naive) conspecifics did not; prior exposure to R. catesbeiana was not related to behavioural avoidance among adult or post‐metamorphic juvenile wild‐reared A. macrodactylum and P. regilla. These results imply that (i) some but not all species of amphibian prey avoid perceived risk from garter snake and bullfrog predators, (ii) the magnitude of this response probably differs according to prey vulnerability to predation in the wild, and (iii) avoidance tends to be largely learned rather than innate. Yet, the limited prevalence and intensity of amphibian responses to predation risk observed herein may be indicative of either a relatively weak predator–prey relationship and/or the limited importance of predator chemical cues in this particular system.     

Sex‐Specific Response of Pardosa milvina (Araneae: Lycosidae) to Experience with a Chemotactile Predation Cue

Predators frequently leave behind chemical information (i.e., semiochemicals such as pheromones or kairomones) that can be detected by their prey and used to avoid areas where predators are likely present. Prey that have interacted indirectly with predators via chemical information thus may gain insight into their risk of being consumed that naïve individuals lack. Pardosa milvina (Araneae: Lycosidae) is a chemosensitive wolf spider that shows adaptive responses to chemotactile cues deposited by the larger wolf spider Tigrosa helluo. We raised offspring from P. milvina to examine the effect of experience with a predation cue on activity, foraging, and antipredator behavior. Spiders differed in activity and foraging behavior across ontogeny and between sexes, but there was no effect of experience with a predation cue. However, a sex‐specific effect of experience was found in antipredator behavior. Male spiders, but not females, used experience with a predator cue to increase their survival in the presence of a live predator. Specifically, naïve males were attacked sooner than experienced males, indicating that prior exposure to predator cues can modify Pardosa antipredator behavior. Intersexual differences in how spiders respond to experience with a predation cue likely reflect the risk of predation faced by males and females in nature.     

Do anuran larvae respond behaviourally to chemical cues from an invasive crayfish predator? A community-wide study

Antipredator behaviour is an important fitness component in most animals. A co-evolutionary history between predator and prey is important for prey to respond adaptively to predation threats. When non-native predator species invade new areas, native prey may not recognise them or may lack effective antipredator defences. However, responses to novel predators can be facilitated by chemical cues from the predators’ diet. The red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii is a widespread invasive predator in the Southwest of the Iberian Peninsula, where it preys upon native anuran tadpoles. In a laboratory experiment we studied behavioural antipredator defences (alterations in activity level and spatial avoidance of predator) of nine anurans in response to P. clarkii chemical cues, and compared them with the defences towards a native predator, the larval dragonfly Aeshna sp. To investigate how chemical cues from consumed conspecifics shape the responses, we raised tadpoles with either a tadpole-fed or starved crayfish, or dragonfly larva, or in the absence of a predator. Five species significantly altered their behaviour in the presence of crayfish, and this was largely mediated by chemical cues from consumed conspecifics. In the presence of dragonflies, most species exhibited behavioural defences and often these did not require the presence of cues from predation events. Responding to cues from consumed conspecifics seems to be a critical factor in facilitating certain behavioural responses to novel exotic predators. This finding can be useful for predicting antipredator responses to invasive predators and help directing conservation efforts to the species at highest risk.     

Biogeographic variation in behavioral and morphological responses to predation risk

The expression of prey antipredator defenses is often related to ambient consumer pressure, and prey express greater defenses under intense consumer pressure. Predation is generally greater at lower latitudes, and antipredator defenses often display a biogeographic pattern. Predation pressure may also vary significantly between habitats within latitudes, making biogeographic patterns difficult to distinguish. Furthermore, invasive predators may also influence the expression of prey defenses in ecological time. The purpose of this study was to determine how these factors influence the strength of antipredator responses. To assess patterns in prey antipredator defenses based upon geographic range (north vs. south), habitat type (wave-protected vs. wave-exposed shores), and invasive predators, we examined how native rock (Cancer irroratus) and invasive green (Carcinus maenas) crab predators influence the behavioral and morphological defenses of dogwhelk (Nucella lapillus) prey from habitats that differ in wave exposure across an ~230 km range within the Gulf of Maine. The expression of behavioral and morphological antipredatory responses varied according to wave exposure, geographic location, and predator species. Dogwhelks from areas with an established history with green crabs exhibited the largest behavioral and morphological antipredator responses to green crabs. Dogwhelk behavioral responses to rock crabs did not vary between habitats or geographic regions, although morphological responses were greater further south where predation pressure was greatest. These findings suggest that dogwhelk responses to invasive and native predators vary according to geographic location and habitat, and are strongly affected by ambient predation pressure due to the invasion history of an exotic predator.     

Underestimating the frequency,strength and cost of antipredator responses with data from GPS collars: an example with wolves and elk

Field studies that rely on fixes from GPS‐collared predators to identify encounters with prey will often underestimate the frequency and strength of antipredator responses. These underestimation biases have several mechanistic causes. (1) Step bias: The distance between successive GPS fixes can be large, and encounters that occur during these intervals go undetected. This bias will generally be strongest for cursorial hunters that can rapidly cover large distances (e.g., wolves and African wild dogs) and when the interval between GPS fixes is long relative to the duration of a hunt. Step bias is amplified as the path travelled between successive GPS fixes deviates from a straight line. (2) Scatter bias: Only a small fraction of the predators in a population typically carry GPS collars, and prey encounters with uncollared predators go undetected unless a collared group‐mate is present. This bias will generally be stronger for fission–fusion hunters (e.g., spotted hyenas, wolves, and lions) than for highly cohesive hunters (e.g., African wild dogs), particularly when their group sizes are large. Step bias and scatter bias both cause underestimation of the frequency of antipredator responses. (3) Strength bias: Observations of prey in the absence of GPS fix from a collared predator will generally include a mixture of cases in which predators were truly absent and cases in which predators were present but not detected, which causes underestimation of the strength of antipredator responses. We quantified these biases with data from wolves and African wild dogs and found that fixes from GPS collars at 3‐h intervals underestimated the frequency and strength of antipredator responses by a factor >10. We reexamined the results of a recent study of the nonconsumptive effects of wolves on elk in light of these results and confirmed that predation risk has strong effects on elk dynamics by reducing the pregnancy rate.     

Interactions between the information content of different chemical cues affect induced defences in tadpoles

Animals often alter their behaviour, morphology and physiology in the presence of predators. These induced defences can be fine‐tuned by a variety of environmental factors such as predator species, acute predation risk or food availability. It has, however, remained unclear what cues influence the extent and quality of induced defences and how the information content of these cues interact to determine the development of antipredator defences. We performed an experiment to study the significance of direct chemical cues, originating from the predators themselves, and indirect cues, released by attacked or consumed prey, for phenotypic responses in Rana dalmatina tadpoles. We reared tadpoles in the presence of caged predators (Triturus vulgaris, Aeshna cyanea) fed either one or three tadpoles every other day outside the tadpole‐rearing tanks. Fifteen hours after food provisioning, predators were put back into the tanks containing focal tadpoles either after washing (direct + digestion‐released cues) or with the water containing remnants of the prey (direct + all types of indirect cues). Our results suggest that direct cues together with digestion‐released cues can be sufficient to induce strong antipredator responses. Induced defences depended on both direct cues, affecting predator‐specific responses, and the quantity of indirect cues, resulting in graded responses to differences in predation threat. Moreover, direct and indirect cues interacted in behaviour, resulting in predator‐specific graded responses. We also observed a decrease in the extent of predator‐induced responses in large tadpoles as compared to small ones. Our results, thus, suggest that prey integrate multiple cues about predators to optimize induced defences and that this process changes during ontogeny.