Morphological and life‐history responses of anurans to predation by an invasive crayfish: an integrative approach

Predator‐induced phenotypic plasticity has been widely documented in response to native predators, but studies examining the extent to which prey can respond to exotic invasive predators are scarce. As native prey often do not share a long evolutionary history with invasive predators, they may lack defenses against them. This can lead to population declines and even extinctions, making exotic predators a serious threat to biodiversity. Here, in a community‐wide study, we examined the morphological and life‐history responses of anuran larvae reared with the invasive red swamp crayfish, Procambarus clarkii, feeding on conspecific tadpoles. We reared tadpoles of nine species until metamorphosis and examined responses in terms of larval morphology, growth, and development, as well as their degree of phenotypic integration. These responses were compared with the ones developed in the presence of a native predator, the larval dragonfly Aeshna sp., also feeding on tadpoles. Eight of the nine species altered their morphology or life history when reared with the fed dragonfly, but only four when reared with the fed crayfish, suggesting among‐species variation in the ability to respond to a novel predator. While morphological defenses were generally similar across species (deeper tails) and almost exclusively elicited in the presence of the fed dragonfly, life‐history responses were very variable and commonly elicited in the presence of the invasive crayfish. Phenotypes induced in the presence of dragonfly were more integrated than in crayfish presence. The lack of response to the presence of the fed crayfish in five of the study species suggests higher risk of local extinction and ultimately reduced diversity of the invaded amphibian communities. Understanding how native prey species vary in their responses to invasive predators is important in predicting the impacts caused by newly established predator–prey interactions following biological invasions.     

Costs and benefits of defences induced by predators differing in dangerousness

While theoretical studies predict that inducible defences should be fine-tuned according to the qualities of the predator, very few studies have investigated how dangerousness of predators, i.e. the rate at which predators kill prey individuals, affects the strength of phenotypic responses and resulting benefits and costs of induced defences. We performed a comprehensive study on fitness consequences of predator-induced responses by involving four predators (leech, water scorpion, dragonfly larva and newt), evaluating costs and benefits of responses, testing differences in dangerousness between predators and measuring responses in several life history traits of prey. We raised Rana dalmatina tadpoles in the presence of free-ranging predators, in the presence of caged predators, and exposed naive and experienced tadpoles to free-ranging predators. Tadpoles adjusted the intensities of their behavioural and morphological defences to predator dangerousness. Survival was lower in the nonlethal presence of the most dangerous predator, while we could not detect costs of induced defences at or after metamorphosis. When exposed to free-ranging predators, small, but not large, tadpoles benefited from exhibiting an induced phenotype in terms of elevated survival when compared to naive tadpoles, but we did not observe higher survival either in tadpoles exhibiting more extreme phenotypes or in tadpoles exposed to the type of predator they were raised with. These results indicate that while predator-induced defences can mirror dangerousness of predators, costs and benefits do not necessarily scale to the magnitude of plastic responses.     

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.     

Evolutionary ecology of inducible morphological plasticity in predator–prey interaction: toward the practical links with population ecology

The outcome of species interactions is often strongly influenced by variation in the functional traits of the individuals participating. A rather large body of work demonstrates that inducible morphological plasticity in predators and prey can both influence and be influenced by species interaction strength, with important consequences for individual fitness. Much of the past research in this area has focused on the ecological and evolutionary significance of trait plasticity by studying single predator–prey pairs and testing the performance of individuals having induced and noninduced phenotypes. This research has thus been critical in improving our understanding of the adaptive value of trait plasticity and its widespread occurrence across species and community types. More recently, researchers have expanded this foundation by examining how the complexity of organismal design and community-level properties can shape plasticity in functional traits. In addition, researchers have begun to merge evolutionary and ecological perspectives by linking trait plasticity to community dynamics, with particular attention on trait-mediated indirect interactions. Here, we review recent studies on inducible morphological plasticity in predators and their prey with an emphasis on internal and external constraints and how the nature of predator–prey interactions influences the expression of inducible phenotypes. In particular, we focus on multiple-trait plasticity, flexibility and modification of inducible plasticity, and reciprocal plasticity between predator and prey. Based on our arguments on these issues, we propose future research directions that should better integrate evolutionary and population studies and thus improve our understanding of the role of phenotypic plasticity in predator–prey population and community dynamics.     

Chemical defense of toad tadpoles under risk by four predator species

Many organisms use inducible defenses as protection against predators. In animals, inducible defenses may manifest as changes in behavior, morphology, physiology, or life history, and prey species can adjust their defensive responses based on the dangerousness of predators. Analogously, prey may also change the composition and quantity of defensive chemicals when they coexist with different predators, but such predator‐induced plasticity in chemical defenses remains elusive in vertebrates. In this study, we investigated whether tadpoles of the common toad (Bufo bufo) adjust their chemical defenses to predation risk in general and specifically to the presence of different predator species; furthermore, we assessed the adaptive value of the induced defense. We reared tadpoles in the presence or absence of one of four caged predator species in a mesocosm experiment, analyzed the composition and quantity of their bufadienolide toxins, and exposed them to free‐ranging predators. We found that toad tadpoles did not respond to predation risk by upregulating their bufadienolide synthesis. Fishes and newts consumed only a small percentage of toad tadpoles, suggesting that bufadienolides provided protection against vertebrate predators, irrespective of the rearing environment. Backswimmers consumed toad tadpoles regardless of treatment. Dragonfly larvae were the most voracious predators and consumed more predator‐naïve toad tadpoles than tadpoles raised in the presence of dragonfly cues. These results suggest that tadpoles in our experiment had high enough toxin levels for an effective defense against vertebrate predators even in the absence of predator cues. The lack of predator‐induced phenotypic plasticity in bufadienolide synthesis may be due to local adaptation for constantly high chemical defense against fishes in the study population and/or due to the high density of conspecifics.     

A native apex predator limits an invasive mesopredator and protects native prey: Tasmanian devils protecting bandicoots from cats

Apex predators can limit the abundance and behaviour of mesopredators, thereby reducing predation on smaller species. We know less about whether native apex predators are effective in suppressing invasive mesopredators, a major global driver of vertebrate extinctions. We use the severe disease‐induced decline of an apex predator, the Tasmanian devil, as a natural experiment to test whether devils limit abundance of invasive feral cats and in turn protect smaller native prey. Cat abundance was c. 58% higher where devils had declined, which in turn negatively affected a smaller native prey species. Devils had a stronger limiting effect on cats than on a native mesopredator, suggesting apex predators may have stronger suppressive effects on evolutionarily naive species than coevolved species. Our results highlight how disease in one species can affect the broader ecosystem. We show that apex predators not only regulate native species but can also confer resistance to the impacts of invasive populations. Apex predators could therefore be a powerful but underutilised tool to prevent biodiversity loss.     

Prey responses to fine‐scale variation in predation risk from combined predators

While it is well documented that organisms can express phenotypic plasticity in response to single gradients of environmental variation, our understanding of how organisms integrate information along multiple environmental gradients is limited in many systems. Using the freshwater snail Helisoma trivolvis and two common predators (water bugs Belostoma flumineum and crayfish Orconectes rusticus), we explored how prey integrate information along multiple predation risk gradients (i.e. caged predators fed increasing amounts of prey biomass) that induce opposing phenotypes. When exposed to single predators fed increasing amounts of prey biomass, we detected threshold responses; intermediate amounts of consumed biomass induced phenotypic responses, but higher amounts induced little additional induction. This suggests that additional increases in predator‐induced traits with greater predator risk offer minimal increases in fitness or that a limit in the response magnitude was reached. Additionally, the response thresholds were contingent on the predator and focal trait. For shell width, responses were generally detected at a lower amount of consumed biomass by water bugs compared to crayfish. Within the crayfish treatments, we found that the shell thickness response threshold was lower than the shell width response threshold. When we combined gradients of consumed biomass from both predators, we found that the magnitude of response to one predator was often reduced when the other predator was present. Interestingly, these effects were often detected at consumed biomass levels that were lower than the threshold concentration necessary to elicit a response in the single‐predator treatments. Moreover, our combined predator treatments revealed that snails shifted from discrete responses to more continuous (i.e. graded) responses. Together, our results reveal that organisms experiencing multiple environmental gradients can integrate this information to make phenotypic decisions and demonstrate the novel result that an exposure to multiple species of predators can lower the response threshold of prey.     

COEVOLUTION OF PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY IN PREDATOR AND PREY: WHY ARE INDUCIBLE OFFENSES RARER THAN INDUCIBLE DEFENSES?

Inducible defenses of prey and inducible offenses of predators are drastic phenotypic changes activated by the interaction between a prey and predator. Inducible defenses occur in many taxa and occur more frequently than inducible offenses. Recent empirical studies have reported reciprocal phenotypic changes in both predator and prey. Here, we model the coevolution of inducible plasticity in both prey and predator, and examine how the evolutionary dynamics of inducible plasticity affect the population dynamics of a predator-prey system. Under a broad range of parameter values, the proportion of predators with an offensive phenotype is smaller than the proportion of prey with a defensive phenotype, and the offense level is relatively lower than the defense level at evolutionary end points. Our model also predicts that inducible plasticity evolves in both species when predation success depends sensitively on the difference in the inducible trait value between the two species. Reciprocal phenotypic plasticity may be widespread in nature but may have been overlooked by field studies because offensive phenotypes are rare and inconspicuous.     

Fear in the dark? Community‐level effects of non‐lethal predators change with light regime

The total effect of predators on prey is a combination of direct consumption, and non‐consumptive effects (NCEs), such as predator‐induced changes to prey morphology, behaviour and life history. Past research into NCEs has tended to focus on pair‐wise interactions between predators and prey, while in natural ecosystems, species exist in complex communities with several trophic levels made up of multiple autotrophic and heterotropic species. To address how predator NCEs alter the photosynthetic and heterotrophic components of communities, we exposed microbial microcosms to one of three predator treatments: live predators (full predator effect), freeze‐killed predators (NCEs only) or no predators (control), and incubated them under either 12 h:12 h light:dark conditions or continual darkness. Under 12 h:12 h light:dark conditions, NCEs‐only communities never differed from predator‐free communities, but differed from live predator communities. Under conditions of continual darkness, the structure of NCEs‐only communities differed from predator‐free controls, but not from live predator communities, suggesting NCEs can be strong enough to structure communities. Predation threat may cause certain prey to induce defences, such as reductions in movement, which make them less competitive in a community setting. This reduction in competitive ability could lead to these species being driven to extinction through interspecific competition, resulting in similar communities to those in which live predators are present. Heterotrophic species whose rates of resource acquisition depend on movement rates may be affected to a greater extent than autotrophs by predator‐induced reductions in movement, accounting for our observed differences in predator NCEs in ‘dark’ and ‘light’ communities. Our results suggest that the community‐level consequences of fear are greater in the dark. Synthesis Predators affect prey through consumptive and non‐consumptive effects (NCEs) such as alterations to prey behaviour, morphology, and life history. However, predators and prey do not exist in isolated pairs, but in complex communities where they interact with many other species. Using a long term study (>10 predator generations), we show that predator NCEs alone can alter community structure under conditions of darkness, but not in a 12h:12h light:dark cycle. Our results demonstrate for the first time that although the community‐level consequences of predator NCEs may be dramatic, they depend upon the abiotic conditions of the ecosystem.     

Predator–prey interactions and metabolic rates are altered in stable and unstable groups in a social fish

Understanding the determinants and consequences of predation effort, success and prey responses is important since these factors affect the fitness of predators and prey. When predators are also invasive species, the impacts on prey can be particularly far-reaching with ultimate ecosystem-level consequences. However, predators are typically viewed as behaviourally fixed within this interaction and it is unclear how variation in predator social dynamics affects predator–prey interactions. Using the invasive eastern mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki and a native glass shrimp Paratya australiensis in Australia, we investigated how varying levels of social conflict within predator groups influences predator–prey interactions. By experimentally manipulating group stability of G. holbrooki, we show that rates of social conflict were lower in groups with large size differences, but that routine metabolic rates were higher in groups with large size differences. Predation effort and success did not vary depending on group stability, but in stable groups predation effort by aggressive dominants was greater than subordinates. The anti-predator responses of prey to the stability of predator groups were mixed. While more prey utilized shelters when exposed to stable compared to unstable groups of predators, a greater proportion were sedentary when predator groups were unstable. Overall, this study demonstrates predator group stability is modulated by differences in body size and can influence prey responses. Further, it reveals a hidden metabolic cost of living in stable groups despite reduced overt social conflict. For invasive species management, it is therefore important to consider the behavioural and physiological plasticity of the invasive predators, whose complex social interactions and metabolic demands can modulate patterns of predator–prey interactions.     

The long‐term impacts of predators on prey: inducible defenses,population dynamics,and indirect effects

Despite the amount of research on the inducible defenses of prey against predators, our understanding of the long‐term significance of non‐lethal predators on prey phenotypes, prey population dynamics, and community structure has rarely been explored. Our objectives were to assess the effects of predators on prey defenses, prey population dynamics, and the relative magnitude of density‐ versus trait‐mediated indirect interactions (DMIIs and TMIIs) over multiple prey generations. Using a freshwater snail and three common snail predators, we constructed a series of community treatments with pond mesocosms that manipulated trophic structure, the identity of the top predator, and whether predators were caged or uncaged. We quantified snail phenotypes, snail population size, and resource abundance over multiple snail generations. We found that snails were expressing inducible defenses in our system although the magnitude of the responses varied over time and across predator species. Despite the expression of inducible defenses, caged predators did not reduce snail population size. There also was no evidence of TMIIs throughout the experiment suggesting that TMIIs have a minimal role in the long‐term structure of our communities. The absence of TMIIs was largely driven by the lack of predator‐induced reductions in resource consumption and the lack of consistent reductions in population size with predator cues. In contrast, we detected strong DMIIs associated with lethal predators suggesting that DMIIs are the dominant long‐term mechanism influencing community structure. Our results demonstrate that although predators can have significant effects on prey phenotypes and sometimes cause short‐term TMIIs, there may be few long‐term consequences of these responses on population dynamics and indirect interactions, at least within simple food webs. Research directed towards addressing the long‐term consequences of predator–prey interactions within communities will help to reveal whether the conclusions and predictions generated from short‐term experiments are applicable over ecological and evolutionary timescales.     

Antipredator Responses by Native Mosquitofish to Non-Native Cichlids: An Examination of the Role of Prey Naiveté

The strong impact of non‐native predators in aquatic systems is thought to relate to the evolutionary naiveté of prey. Due to isolation and limited dispersal, this naiveté may be relatively high in freshwater systems. In this study, we tested this notion by examining the antipredator response of native mosquitofish, Gambusia holbrooki, to two non‐native predators found in the Everglades, the African jewelfish, Hemichromis letourneuxi, and the Mayan cichlid, Cichlasoma urophthalmus. We manipulated prey naiveté by using two mosquitofish populations that varied in their experience with the recent invader, the African jewelfish, but had similar levels of experience with the longer‐established Mayan cichlid. Specifically, we tested these predictions: (1) predator hunting modes differed between the two predators, (2) predation rates would be higher by the novel jewelfish predator, (3) particularly on the naive population living where jewelfish have not invaded yet, (4) antipredator responses would be stronger to Mayan cichlids due to greater experience and weaker and/or ineffective to jewelfish, and (5) especially weakest by the naive population. We assayed prey and predator behavior, and prey mortality in lab aquaria where both predators and prey were free‐ranging. Predator hunting modes and habitat domains differed, with jewelfish being more active search predators that used slightly higher parts of the water column and less of the habitat structure relative to Mayan cichlids. In disagreement with our predictions, predation rates were similar between the two predators, antipredator responses were stronger to African jewelfish (except for predator inspections), and there was no difference in response between jewelfish‐savvy and jewelfish‐naive populations. These results suggest that despite the novelty of introduced predators, prey may be able to respond appropriately if non‐native predator archetypes are similar enough to those of native predators, if prey rely on general antipredator responses or predation cues, and/or show neophobic responses.     

An offensive predator phenotype selects for an amplified defensive phenotype in its prey

Inducible defenses of prey and inducible offenses of predators are examples of adaptive phenotypic plasticity. Although evolutionary ecologists have paid considerable attention to the adaptive significances of these strategies, they have rarely focused on their evolutionary impacts on the interacting species. Because the functional phenotypes of predator and prey determine strength of interactions between the species, the inducible plasticity can modify selective pressure on trait distribution and, ultimately, trait evolution in the interacting species. We experimentally tested this hypothesis in a predator–prey system composed of salamander larvae (Hynobius retardatus) and frog tadpoles (Rana pirica) capable of expressing antagonistic inducible offensive or defensive traits, an enlarged gape in the salamander larvae and a bulgy body in the tadpoles, when predator–prey interactions are strong. We examined selection strength on the tadpole’s defensive trait by comparing survival rates of tadpoles with different defensive levels under predation pressure from offensive or non-offensive salamander larvae. Survival rates of more-defensive tadpoles were greater than those of less-defensive tadpoles only when the tadpoles were exposed to offensive salamander larvae; thus, the predator’s offensive phenotype could select for an amplified defensive phenotype in their prey. As the expression of inducible offenses by H. retardatus larvae depends greatly on the composition of its ecological community, the inducible defensive bulgy morph of R. pirica tadpoles might have evolved in response to the variable expression of the H. retardatus offensive larval phenotype.     

Feedback between size balance and consumption strongly affects the consequences of hatching phenology in size‐dependent predator–prey interactions

In many size‐dependent predator–prey systems, hatching phenology strongly affects predator–prey interaction outcomes. Early‐hatched predators can easily consume prey when they first interact because they encounter smaller prey. However, this process by itself may be insufficient to explain all predator–prey interaction outcomes over the whole interaction period because the predator–prey size balance changes dynamically throughout their ontogeny. We hypothesized that hatching phenology influences predator–prey interactions via a feedback mechanism between the predator–prey size balance and prey consumption by predators. We experimentally tested this hypothesis in an amphibian predator–prey model system. Frog tadpoles Rana pirica were exposed to a predatory salamander larva Hynobius retardatus that had hatched 5, 12, 19 or 26 days after the frog tadpoles hatched. We investigated how the salamander hatch timing affected the dynamics of prey mortality, size changes of both predator and prey, and their subsequent life history (larval period and size at metamorphosis). The predator–prey size balance favoured earlier hatched salamanders, which just after hatching could successfully consume more frog tadpoles than later hatched salamanders. The early‐hatched salamanders grew rapidly and their accelerated growth enabled them to maintain the predator‐superior size balance; thus, they continued to exert strong predation pressure on the frog tadpoles in the subsequent period. Furthermore, frog tadpoles exposed to the early‐hatched salamanders were larger at metamorphosis and had a longer larval period than other frog tadpoles. These results suggest that feedback between the predator‐superior size balance and prey consumption is a critical mechanism that strongly affects the impacts of early hatching of predators in the short‐term population dynamics and life history of the prey. Because consumption of large nutrient‐rich prey items supports the growth of predators, a similar feedback mechanism may be common and have strong impacts on phenological shifts in size‐dependent trophic relationships.     

Fleeing towards death – leech‐induced behavioural defences increase freshwater snail susceptibility to predatory fish

Prey species are often exposed to multiple predators, which presents several difficulties to prey species. This is especially true when the response to one predator influences the prey’s susceptibility to other predators. Predator‐induced defences have evolved in a wide range of prey species, and experiments involving predators with different hunting strategies allow researchers to evaluate how prey respond to multiple threats. Freshwater snails are known to respond to a variety of predators with both morphological and behavioural defences. Here we studied how freshwater snails Radix balthica responded behaviourally to fish and leech predators, both separately and together. Our aim was to explore whether conflicting predator‐induced responses existed and, if so, what effect they had on snail survival when both predatory fish and leeches were present. We found that although R. balthica increased refuge use when exposed to predatory fish, they decreased refuge use when exposed to predatory leeches. When both predators were present, snails showed a stronger response towards leech than fish and responded by leaving the refuge. This response made the snails more susceptible to fish predation, which increased snail mortality when exposed to both fish and leech compared to fish only. We show that predators that have a relatively low predation rate can substantially increase mortality rates by indirect effects. By forcing snails out of refuges such as rock and macrophyte habitats, leeches can indirectly increase predation from molluscivorous fish and may thus affect snail densities.     

Do native predators benefit from non‐native prey?

Despite knowledge on invasive species’ predatory effects, we know little of their influence as prey. Non‐native prey should have a neutral to positive effect on native predators by supplementing the prey base. However, if non‐native prey displace native prey, then an invader's net influence should depend on both its abundance and value relative to native prey. We conducted a meta‐analysis to quantify the effect of non‐native prey on native predator populations. Relative to native prey, non‐native prey similarly or negatively affect native predators, but only when studies employed a substitutive design that examined the effects of each prey species in isolation from other prey. When native predators had access to non‐native and native prey simultaneously, predator abundance increased significantly relative to pre‐invasion abundance. Although non‐native prey may have a lower per capita value than native prey, they seem to benefit native predators by serving as a supplemental prey resource.     

Temporal environmental variation and phenotypic plasticity: a mechanism underlying priority effects

Understanding the role of history in the formation of communities has been a major challenge in community ecology. Here, we explore the role of phenotypic plasticity and its associated trait‐mediated indirect interactions as a mechanism behind priority effects. Using organisms with inducible defenses as a model system, we examine how aquatic communities initially containing different predator environments are affected at the individual and community level by the colonization of a second predator. Snails and tadpoles were established in four different caged‐predator environments (no predator, fish, crayfish or water bugs). These four communities were then crossed with three predator colonization treatments (no colonization, early colonization, or late colonization) using lethal water bugs as the predator. The snails responded to the caged predator environments with predator‐specific behavioral and morphological defenses. In the colonization treatments, snails possessing the wrong phenotype attempted to induce phenotypic changes to defend themselves against the new risk. However, snails initially induced by a different predator environment often suffered high predation rates. Hence, temporal variation in predation risk not only challenged the snail prey to try to track this environmental variation through time by adjusting their defensive phenotypes, but also caused trait‐mediated interactions between snails and the colonizing predator. For tadpoles within these communities, there was little evidence that the morphological responses of snails indirectly effected tadpole predation rates by colonizing water bugs. Unexpectedly, predation rates on tadpoles by colonizing water bugs were generally higher in the three caged‐predator treatments, suggesting that water bugs elevated their foraging activity in response to potentially competing predators. In summary, we demonstrate an important priority effect in which the initial occurrence of one species of predator can facilitate predation by a second predator that colonizes at a later date (i.e. a TMII) suggesting that phenotypic plasticity can be an important driver behind priority effects (i.e. historical exposure to predators).     

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.     

Phylogenetic patterns of trait and trait plasticity evolution: Insights from amphibian embryos

Environmental variation favors the evolution of phenotypic plasticity. For many species, we understand the costs and benefits of different phenotypes, but we lack a broad understanding of how plastic traits evolve across large clades. Using identical experiments conducted across North America, we examined prey responses to predator cues. We quantified five life‐history traits and the magnitude of their plasticity for 23 amphibian species/populations (spanning three families and five genera) when exposed to no cues, crushed‐egg cues, and predatory crayfish cues. Embryonic responses varied considerably among species and phylogenetic signal was common among the traits, whereas phylogenetic signal was rare for trait plasticities. Among trait‐evolution models, the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck (OU) model provided the best fit or was essentially tied with Brownian motion. Using the best fitting model, evolutionary rates for plasticities were higher than traits for three life‐history traits and lower for two. These data suggest that the evolution of life‐history traits in amphibian embryos is more constrained by a species’ position in the phylogeny than is the evolution of life history plasticities. The fact that an OU model of trait evolution was often a good fit to patterns of trait variation may indicate adaptive optima for traits and their plasticities.