Non‐lethal predator effects on the performance of a native and an exotic crayfish species

1. I tested the hypothesis that the potential for non‐lethal effects of predators are more important for overall performance of the fast‐growing exotic signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus Dana) than for the slower growing native noble crayfish (Astacus astacus L.). I further tested if omnivorous crayfish switched to feed on less risky food sources in the presence of predators, a behaviour that could reduce the feeding costs associated with predator avoidance. 2. In a 2 month long outdoor pool experiment, I measured behaviour, survival, cheliped loss, growth, and food consumption in juvenile noble or signal crayfish in pools with either a caged predatory dragonfly larvae (Aeshna sp.), a planktivorous fish that do not feed on crayfish (sunbleak, Leucaspius delineatus Heckel), or predator‐free controls. Crayfish had access to multiple food sources: live zooplankton, detritus and periphyton. Frozen chironomid larvae were also supplied ad libitum outside crayfish refuges, simulating food in a risky habitat. 3. Crayfish were mainly active during hours of darkness, with signal crayfish spending significantly more time outside refuges than noble crayfish. The proportion of crayfish outside refuges varied between crayfish species, time and predator treatment, with signal crayfish spending more time in refuges at night in the presence of fish. 4. Survival in noble crayfish was higher than in signal crayfish, and signal crayfish had a higher frequency of lost chelipeds, indicating a high level of intraspecific interactions. Crayfish survival was not affected by the presence of predators. 5. Gut‐contents analysis and stable isotope values of carbon (δ¹³C) and nitrogen (δ¹⁵N) indicated that the two crayfish species had similar food preferences, and that crayfish received most of their energy from feeding on invertebrates (e.g. chironomid larvae), although detritus was the most frequent food item in their guts. Signal crayfish guts were more full than those of noble crayfish, but signal crayfish in pools with fish contained significantly less food and fewer had consumed chironomids compared with predator‐free controls. Length increase of signal crayfish (35%) was significantly higher than of noble crayfish (20%), but signal crayfish in pools with fish grew less than in control pools. 6. This short‐term study indicates that fish species that do not pose a lethal threat to an organism may indirectly cause reductions in growth by affecting behaviour and feeding. This may occur even though prey are omnivorous and have access to and consume multiple food sources. These non‐lethal effects of predators are expected to be particularly important in exotic crayfish species that show a general response to fish, have high individual growth rates, and when their feeding on the most profitable food source is reduced.