Overriding the oddity effect in mixed-species aggregations: group choice by armored and nonarmored prey

Because "odd" individuals often suffer disproportionately highrates of predation, solitary individuals should join groupswhose members are most similar to themselves in appearance.We examined group-choice decisions by individuals in armoredand nonarmored species and predicted that either (1) the oddityeffect would result in preference for conspecific groups forsolitary individuals of both species, or (2) individuals inthe armored species would prefer to associate with groups containingindividuals of the more vulnerable species. Armored brook sticklebacks(Culaea inconstans) and nonarmored fathead minnows (Pimephalespromelas) have the same predators and often occur together instreams. In mixed-species shoals, yellow perch (Perca flavescens)attacked minnows earlier and more often than sticklebacks. Wetested whether solitary minnows and sticklebacks preferred toassociate with conspecific or heterospecific shoals under conditionsof both low and high predation risk. When predation risk washigh, minnows preferred to associate with conspecifics overheterospecifics, as predicted by the oddity effect. In contrast,sticklebacks preferentially associated with groups of minnowsover groups of conspecifics when predation risk was high. Whenpredation risk was low, solitary individuals of both speciespreferentially associated with conspecific over heterospecificshoals. Stickleback shoal choices under low-risk conditionsmay have been influenced by interspecific competition for food.In feeding experiments, minnows were more efficient foragersthan sticklebacks, so it should benefit sticklebacks to avoidminnows unless predation risk is high. Therefore, for armoredprey, the benefits of associating with more vulnerable preyappear to override the costs of both the oddity effect and foodcompetition when predation risk is high.