Contextual behavioural plasticity in Italian agile frog (Rana latastei) tadpoles exposed to native and alien predator cues

Effects of predation risk on the sensory asymmetries and defensive strategies of Bufotes balearicus tadpoles

Lateralization consists of the differential use of bilateral organs or limbs and is well described in many taxa and in several contexts. Common ecological frameworks where it can be observed are foraging and predatory ones, with benefits related to both visual and auditory lateralization such as faster response or increasing neural processing ability. Anuran amphibians are considered relevant models for investigating lateralization, due to their great ecological variety and the possibility of easily being raised under laboratory conditions. By adopting the "rotational preference test", we used Balearic green toad tadpoles to test the effects of behavioural defensive responses triggered by different predator types (native vs alien, i.e. dragonfly larvae Aeshna cyanea and adult red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii) and diets (fasted vs. tadpole-fed predators) on their lateralization. We recorded tadpoles' responses to five different chemical cues: clean water (control treatment), fasted dragonfly larvae and crayfish, and tadpole-fed dragonfly larvae and crayfish. Green toad tadpoles did not show a bias in a predominant direction, although lateralization occurred at the individual level, as shown by the intensity index (L_A). Perceived predation risk was the highest in tadpoles exposed to the combined chemical cues of conspecific prey and native predators, which elicited both changes in the intensity of lateralization and a marked reduction in tadpoles' activity level. Our results suggest that contextual predation threat may induce very rapid changes in the expression of asymmetries at the individual level, and might play a role as part of the complex defensive strategies adopted by prey in the attempt to escape predators.

Anti-predator behavioral responses of Italian agile frog tadpoles (Rana latastei) exposed to microplastics

Microplastics (MPs) are nowadays abundant, persistent, and ubiquitous in the environment, representing a new threat for terrestrial, marine, and freshwater ecosystems. Although anuran populations and species are globally declining, the effect of MP exposure on this taxon has been poorly investigated. With the aim of assessing the effects of microplastic exposure on the defensive responses of Italian agile frog (Rana latastei) tadpoles, we exposed them to three different concentrations (1, 7, and 50 mg L^-1) of a mixture of plastic polymers (HPDE, PVC, PS, and PES) for 2 weeks. Then, we measured the total distance covered by individual tadpoles before and after exposure to tadpole-fed dragonfly larvae (Aeshna cyanea) cues. As expected, predation risk sharply lowered the total distance travelled by tadpoles; however, MP concentration did not affect their defensive performances. We also collected data on tadpole development, activity, and mortality. In contrast with previous experiments, neither tadpole growth nor mortality varied with MP concentration. Our results indicate that the intensity of MP effects on growth and development may depend on tadpole size, with large tadpoles being less susceptible to the negative effects of MP exposure.

Ineffective integration of multiple anti-predator defenses in a rotifer: a low-cost insurance?

To maximize survival, prey often integrates multiple anti-predator defenses. How the defenses interact to reduce predation risk is, however, poorly known. We used the rotifer Brachionus calyciflorus to investigate how morphological (spines) and behavioral (floating) defenses are integrated against a common predatory rotifer, Asplanchna brightwellii, and if their combined use improves survival. To this end, we assessed the cost of the behavioral defense and the efficiency of both defenses, individually and combined, as well as their mutual dependency. The results show that the behavioral defense is costly in reducing foraging activity, and that the two defenses are used simultaneously, with the presence of the morphological defense enhancing the use of the behavioral defense, as does the pre-exposure to predator cues. However, while the morphological defense reduces predation risk, the behavioral defense does not, thus, adding the costly behavioral defense to the morphological defense does not improve survival. It is likely that the cost of the behavioral defense is low given its reversibility—compared to the cost of misidentifying the predator species—and that this has promoted the adoption of both defenses, as general low-cost insurance rather than as a tailored strategy toward specific predators. Thus, the optimal strategy in the rotifer appears to be to express both morphological and behavioral defenses when confronted with the cues of a potential predator.