Suction feeding mechanics, performance, and diversity in fishes

Despite almost 50 years of research on the functional morphologyand biomechanics of suction feeding, no consensus has emergedon how to characterize suction-feeding performance, or its morphologicalbasis. We argue that this lack of unity in the literature isdue to an unusually indirect and complex linkage between themuscle contractions that power suction feeding, the skeletalmovements that underlie buccal expansion, the sharp drop inbuccal suction pressure that occurs during expansion, the flowof water that enters the mouth to eliminate the pressure gradient,and the forces that are ultimately exerted on the prey by thisflow. This complexity has led various researchers to focus individuallyon suction pressure, flow velocity, or the distance the preymoves as metrics of suction-feeding performance. We attemptto integrate a mechanistic view of the ability of fish to performthese components of suction feeding. We first discuss a modelthat successfully relates aspects of cranial morphology to thecapacity to generate suction pressure in the buccal cavity.This model is a particularly valuable tool for studying theevolution of the feeding mechanism. Second, we illustrate themultidimensional nature of suction-feeding performance in acomparison of bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus, and largemouthbass, Micropterus salmoides, two species that represent oppositeends of the spectrum of performance in suction feeding. As anticipated,bluegills had greater accuracy, lower peak flux into the mouth,and higher flow velocity and acceleration of flow than did bass.While the differences between species in accuracy of strikeand peak water flux were substantial, peak suction velocityand acceleration were only about 50% higher in bluegill, a relativelymodest difference. However, a hydrodynamic model of the forcesthat suction feeders exert on their prey shows that this differencein velocity is amplified by a positive effect of the smallermouth aperture of bluegill on force exerted on the prey. Ourmodel indicates that the pressure gradient in front of a fishthat is feeding by suction, associated with the gradient inwater velocity, results in a force on the prey that is largerthan drag or acceleration reaction. A smaller mouth apertureresults in a steeper pressure gradient that exerts a greaterforce on the prey, even when other features of the suction floware held constant. Our work shows that some aspects of suction-feedingperformance can be determined from morphology, but that thecomplexity of the behavior requires a diversity of perspectivesto be used in order to adequately characterize performance.