Heron Guano

[awhuber]

Heron Rookeries arent hard to find...Usually see them by the river, 75'-100' off the ground in giant sycamore trees. You will need some good climbing gear.

There is a giant rookery on the upper Current. Let me know if you want me to show it to you.

[Tim Smith]

Excellent suggestions guys. I might try calling shepherd of the hills tomorrow and see if I can come down there and find some. Hey Eric, you can send your control sample to MSU. Just dump in a box and send it to the Biology Department Head with a note that says, "from your adoring students". Better yet send it to the president. Thanks for the suggestions guys.

Is this guano supposed to provide an actual "alarm substance" (shrekstoff) or just a chemical cue that the herons are there?

And if you're aiming for the alarm substances, does it matter if the herons have been eating congeners?

Is the idea to get enough...heron stuff...that your chances that something is eating cyprinids or other species that make alarm substances is statistically high?

Might want to find rookeries near cyprinid-dominated streams if any of these are considerations.

[smallmouthjoe]

Is this guano supposed to provide an actual "alarm substance" (shrekstoff) or just a chemical cue that the herons are there?

And if you're aiming for the alarm substances, does it matter if the herons have been eating congeners?

Is the idea to get enough...heron stuff...that your chances that something is eating cyprinids or other species that make alarm substances is statistically high?

Might want to find rookeries near cyprinid-dominated streams if any of these are considerations.

No I'm not looking at shrekstoff specifically, really any chemical that could cause a change in behavior (decreased activity, tighter schooling, etc.) in the minnows. Be it some sort of chemical that is unique to ciconiiformes or from the digested remains of cyprinids containing shrekstoff. That is an interesting point and may be worth further study if I do find anything. Is the chemical alarm from something unique to ciconiiformes or is it due to the digested remains of cyprinids that contain trace amounts of shrekstoff?

[Tim Smith]

No I'm not looking at shrekstoff specifically, really any chemical that could cause a change in behavior (decreased activity, tighter schooling, etc.) in the minnows. Be it some sort of chemical that is unique to ciconiiformes or from the digested remains of cyprinids containing shrekstoff. That is an interesting point and may be worth further study if I do find anything. Is the chemical alarm from something unique to ciconiiformes or is it due to the digested remains of cyprinids that contain trace amounts of shrekstoff?

I'm sure you're way ahead of all this, Joe, but here are a few citations you might find interesting while you're sorting out your experimental design. The last one has a sweet bibliography.

LOCALIZED DEFECATION BY PIKE - A RESPONSE TO LABELING BY CYPRINID ALARM PHEROMONE

Author(s): BROWN GE, CHIVERS DP, SMITH RJF

Source: BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY Volume: 36 Issue: 2 Pages: 105-110 Published: FEB 1995

Times Cited: 57 References: 37 Citation Map

Abstract: Fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) that have never encountered a predatory pike (Esox lucius), are able to detect conspecific alarm pheromone in a pike's diet if the pike has recently consumed minnows. It remains unclear how this minnow alarm pheromone is secreted by pike and if a pike is able to avoid being labelled as a potential predator by localizing these cues away from its foraging range. The first experiment determined that minnow alarm pheromone is present in pike feces when pike are fed minnows. Individual fathead minnows exhibited a fright response to a stimulus of pike feces if the pike had been fed minnows, but not if the pike had been fed swordtails, which lack alarm pheromone. Individual minnows also exhibited a fright reaction to alarm pheromone in the water (which contained no feces) housing pike which had been fed minnows, suggesting that alarm pheromone is also released in urine, mucous secretions and/or via respiration. The second experiment determined that test pike spent a significantly greater proportion of time in the ''home area'' of the test tanks (i.e. where they were fed) but the majority of feces were deposited in the opposite end of the test tank. By localizing their defecation away from the home or foraging area, pike may be able to counter the effects of being labelled as a predator by the alarm pheromone of the prey species.

Damselfly larvae learn to recognize predators from chemical cues in the predator's diet

Author(s): Chivers DP, Wisenden BD, Smith RJF

Source: ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR Volume: 52 Pages: 315-320 Part: Part 2 Published: AUG 1996

Times Cited: 118 References: 26 Citation Map

Abstract: Chemosensory recognition of predators by naive prey may be facilitated if the predator's diet chemically 'labels' the predator. In a laboratory experiment, behaviour patterns were quantified in individual damselfly larvae, Enallagma spp., that had never been exposed to pike, Esox lucius, before and after exposing the damselflies to one of three chemical stimuli: water from a tank that held pike fed a diet of (1) damselflies, (2) fathead minnows, Pimephales promelas, or (3) mealworms, Tenebrio molitor. Damselflies decreased their frequency of feeding bites, head bends and moves in response to stimuli from pike fed damselflies and pike fed fathead minnows, but not to stimuli from pike fed mealworms. Damselflies are sympatric with fathead minnows in the population tested, and probably have many of the same predators. A response to stimuli from pike fed fathead minnows indicates that damselflies associate predation risk with stimuli from injured minnows. In a second experiment, responses of damselflies previously exposed to stimuli from pike fed one of the three treatment diets (damselfly, fathead minnow or mealworm) were tested for a response to stimuli from pike fed mealworms. Damselflies that had been exposed to stimuli from pike fed damselflies or fathead minnows in the first experiment responded to stimuli from pike fed mealworms in the second experiment, but damselflies exposed to pike fed mealworms in the first experiment did not. Thus (1) pike-naive damselflies may initially respond to chemical stimuli from pike based on stimuli of conspecifics or familiar heterospecifics in the pike's diet, and (2) damselflies can learn to recognize chemical stimuli of pike irrespective of the pike's recent feeding regime based on the initial association with damselflies or minnows in the pike's diet. © 1996 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour

Transmission of fright reaction between different species of fish

Author(s): Krause, Jens

Source: Behaviour Volume: 127 Issue: 1-2 Pages: 37-48 Published: 1993

Abstract: Awareness of predators in group living species can be brought about in two ways. Either an individual directly senses a predator itself or it gets indirect information by monitoring other group members which have detected a predator. In this paper, I demonstrate such information transfer between two species of fish. A mixed shoal of chub (Leuciscus cephalus) and sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus) was presented with Schreckstoff, an alarm substance, wide-spread among cyprinid fishes. Sticklebacks are not sensitive to Schreckstoff and their behaviour was observed in the presence of naive and habituated chub. Naive chub responded to Schreckstoff with a strong and immediate fright reaction whereas habituated chub did not. Sticklebacks only displayed a fright reaction when associated with naive chub, which indicates that they can obtain information about a potential predator threat by monitoring the behaviour of the chub. This result suggests that shoaling with Schreckstoff-sensitive cyprinids can provide a benefit for sticklebacks.

Chemical ecology of predator-prey interactions in aquatic ecosystems: a review and prospectus

Author(s): Ferrari MCO (Ferrari, Maud C. O.)1, Wisenden BD (Wisenden, Brian D.)2, Chivers DP (Chivers, Douglas P.)1

Source: CANADIAN JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE ZOOLOGIE Volume: 88 Issue: 7 Special Issue: Sp. Iss. SI Pages: 698-724 Published: JUL 2010

Times Cited: 3 References: 298 Citation Map

Abstract: The interaction between predator and prey is an evolutionary arms race, for which early detection by either party is often the key to success. In aquatic ecosystems, olfaction is an essential source of information for many prey and predators and a number of cues have been shown to play a key role in trait-mediated indirect interactions in aquatic communities. Here, we review the nature and role of predator kairomones, chemical alarm cues, disturbance cues, and diet cues on the behaviour, morphology, life history, and survival of aquatic prey, focusing primarily on the discoveries from the last decade. Many advances in the field have been accomplished: testing the survival value of those chemicals, providing field validation of laboratory results, understanding the extent to which chemically mediated learning may benefit the prey, understanding the role of these chemicals in mediating morphological and life-history adaptations, and most importantly, the selection pressures leading to the evolution of chemical alarm cues. Although considerable advances have been made, several key questions remain, the most urgent of which is to understand the chemistry behind these interactions.

[id10t]

I'm sure you're way ahead of all this, Joe, but here are a few citations you might find interesting while you're sorting out your experimental design. The last one has a sweet bibliography.

My head hurts. Science just baffles me. Questions baffle me. Critical thinking makes me shut down. It took years to get over the Bird Science in Monty Pythons Holy Grail. Anyone remember this study.

[wind]

[clop clop]

ARTHUR: Whoa there!

[clop clop]

GUARD #1: Halt! Who goes there?

ARTHUR: It is I, Arthur, son of Uther Pendragon, from the castle

of Camelot. King of the Britons, defeator of the Saxons, sovereign

of all England!

GUARD #1: Pull the other one!

ARTHUR: I am. And this my trusty servant Patsy.

We have ridden the length and breadth of the land in search of knights

who will join me in my court of Camelot. I must speak with your lord

and master.

GUARD #1: What, ridden on a horse?

ARTHUR: Yes!

GUARD #1: You're using coconuts!

ARTHUR: What?

GUARD #1: You've got two empty halves of coconut and you're bangin'

'em together.

ARTHUR: So? We have ridden since the snows of winter covered this

land, through the kingdom of Mercea, through--

GUARD #1: Where'd you get the coconut?

ARTHUR: We found them.

GUARD #1: Found them? In Mercea? The coconut's tropical!

ARTHUR: What do you mean?

GUARD #1: Well, this is a temperate zone.

ARTHUR: The swallow may fly south with the sun or the house martin

or the plumber may seek warmer climes in winter yet these are not

strangers to our land.

GUARD #1: Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?

ARTHUR: Not at all, they could be carried.

GUARD #1: What -- a swallow carrying a coconut?

ARTHUR: It could grip it by the husk!

GUARD #1: It's not a question of where he grips it! It's a simple

question of weight ratios! A five ounce bird could not carry a 1 pound

coconut.

ARTHUR: Well, it doesn't matter. Will you go and tell your master

that Arthur from the Court of Camelot is here.

GUARD #1: Listen, in order to maintain air-speed velocity, a swallow

needs to beat its wings 43 times every second, right?

ARTHUR: Please!

GUARD #1: Am I right?

ARTHUR: I'm not interested!

GUARD #2: It could be carried by an African swallow!

GUARD #1: Oh, yeah, an African swallow maybe, but not a European

swallow, that's my point.

GUARD #2: Oh, yeah, I agree with that...

ARTHUR: Will you ask your master if he wants to join my court

at Camelot?!

GUARD #1: But then of course African swallows are not migratory.

GUARD #2: Oh, yeah...

GUARD #1: So they couldn't bring a coconut back anyway...

[clop clop]

GUARD #2: Wait a minute -- supposing two swallows carried it together?

GUARD #1: No, they'd have to have it on a line.

GUARD #2: Well, simple! They'd just use a standard creeper!

GUARD #1: What, held under the dorsal guiding feathers?

GUARD #2: Well, why not?

[Tim Smith]

That's my favorite study.

The other ones say some minnows can tell if other minnows have been attacked or eaten and they avoid that spot with that smell.

[smallmouthjoe]

Thanks for the papers Tim. The one about the interspecfic communication between the chubs and the sticklebacks is really interesting. I may use it for a paper presentation later in the semester.

[Tim Smith]

Thanks for the papers Tim. The one about the interspecfic communication between the chubs and the sticklebacks is really interesting. I may use it for a paper presentation later in the semester.

This issue has an unlimited number of interesting angles and I envy you the chance to sink your teeth into a project like that.

I helped Jeff Steinmetz work on a similar project with effects of kingfishers on stream communities and he also measured cormorant predation on smolts on a project I did in California with steelhead. Jeff's an approachable guy if you ever want to track him down talk to him about herons.

[smallmouthjoe]

This issue has an unlimited number of interesting angles and I envy you the chance to sink your teeth into a project like that.

I helped Jeff Steinmetz work on a similar project with effects of kingfishers on stream communities and he also measured cormorant predation on smolts on a project I did in California with steelhead. Jeff's an approachable guy if you ever want to track him down talk to him about herons.

I would really like to get in contact with him, or at least see some of the research he has done in regard to the Kingfishers. Would you mind sending his e-mail my way? Maybe he could send some of the research he's been working on with allomones.

[Tim Smith]

Here's where that work published.

Birds are overlooked top predators in aquatic food webs.

Author(s): Steinmetz, Jeff (jsteinmetz@life.uiuc.edu); Kohler, Steven L.; Soluk, Daniel A.

Source: Ecology (Washington D C) Volume: 84 Issue: 5 Pages: 1324-1328 Published: May 2003

Abstract: Most freshwater food web models assume that fish occupy the top trophic level. Yet many diet studies and a few caging and artificial stream experiments suggest that birds may be top predators in many freshwater systems. We conducted a large-scale field experiment to test whether avian predators affect the size distribution and abundance of fish in two midwestern streams. We used a combination of netting and perches to manipulate predation by Great Blue Herons (Ardea herodias) and Belted Kingfishers (Ceryle alcyon), and measured the response in the fish assemblage. Bird exclusions caused significant increases in medium size classes of two common prey, striped shiners (Luxilus chrysocephalus) and central stonerollers (Campostoma anomalum). We show that these species of piscivorous birds can alter the abundance of common prey and thus need to be considered more fully when attempting to explain the structure of aquatic food webs.

Address: Steinmetz, Jeff ; Center for Aquatic Ecology, Illinois Natural History Survey, 607 E. Peabody Drive, Champaign, IL, 61820, USA

All three of these authors have left the INHS. I think Jeff is a professor in South Carolina now...not sure which school. See your PMs.