http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset/700288
eng; USA
utf8
dataset
Highest level of data collection, from a common set of sensors or instrumentation, usually within the same research project
Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO)
Unavailable
508-289-2009
WHOI MS#36
Woods Hole
MA
02543
USA
info@bco-dmo.org
http://www.bco-dmo.org
Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm
For questions regarding this resource, please contact BCO-DMO via the email address provided.
pointOfContact
2017-05-18
ISO 19115-2 Geographic Information - Metadata - Part 2: Extensions for Imagery and Gridded Data
ISO 19115-2:2009(E)
Fish species preferences by predators in the Bahamas in 2013
2017-05-16
publication
2017-05-16
revision
Marine Biological Laboratory/Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Library (MBLWHOI DLA)
2019-06-11
publication
https://doi.org/10.1575/1912/bco-dmo.700288.1
Mark Hixon
University of Hawai'i
principalInvestigator
Emily Anderson
Old Dominion University
principalInvestigator
Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO)
Unavailable
508-289-2009
WHOI MS#36
Woods Hole
MA
02543
USA
info@bco-dmo.org
http://www.bco-dmo.org
Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm
For questions regarding this resource, please contact BCO-DMO via the email address provided.
publisher
Cite this dataset as: Hixon, M., Anderson, E. (2017) Fish species preferences by predators in the Bahamas in 2013. Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO). (Version 1) Version Date 2017-05-16 [if applicable, indicate subset used]. doi:10.1575/1912/bco-dmo.700288.1 [access date]
Hunting patterns by predator species. Dataset Description: <p>Behavioral response of invasive lionfish versus native grouper when presented with two congeneric prey fishes (fairy and blackcap basslets) in aquaria.</p>
<p><strong>For related datasets, please visit the project link: https://www.bco-dmo.org/project/561017</strong></p> Methods and Sampling: <p>We conducted all experimental trials in 50 gallon (ca. 190 l) acrylic aquarium tanks (91.5 × 38 × 51 cm) with continuous flow-through seawater systems. Food was withheld from predators for 24 h prior to observation to ensure predator response to the presence of prey. Tanks were divided in half with a removable central barrier of solid aluminum (Fig. 1). We released a single predator into one side of the tank and placed 2 basslets in the other side. Basslets were held in identical small glass containers (~500 ml) with mesh covers (1 basslet per container) positioned in each corner of the tank. These prey containers ensured that predators were able to receive both visual and chemical cues from basslets, but could neither make physical contact nor consume any basslets.</p>
<p>To determine whether the preference of predators for basslets was driven by basslet species (fairy and blackcap) or basslet size (small and large: 1.7–2.5 and 3.5–5.2 cm TL, respectively) we presented pairs of basslets in cross-factored combinations of the 2 variables, resulting in the following treatments: (1) small fairy and large fairy, (2) small blackcap and large blackcap, (3) small fairy and small blackcap, (4) large fairy and large blackcap, (5) small fairy and large blackcap, and (6) large fairy and small blackcap. In addition to randomizing the order of basslet treatments presented to each predator, we also randomized the corner of the tank basslets were placed in every time a treatment was presented.</p>
<p>Once the predator and basslets were in their respective sides of the tank, we allowed them to acclimate for 20 min, after which we removed the central barrier and observed the predator’s behavior for 10 min. Observations were performed either in person (74 lionfish trials; 73 graysby trials) or filmed with a digital video camera (16 lionfish trials; 17 graysby trials) positioned outside of the tank. During each 10 min trial, we recorded (1) which basslet the predator hunted first (initial hunting preference); (2) the number of times the predator’s mouth made physical contact with each glass container (number of strikes); and (3) the amount of time the predator hunted each basslet (hunting time). We defined the hunting behavior of lionfish as occurring when an individual directly faced a basslet with flared pectoral fins and/or blew pulsed jets of water towards a basslet (Cure et al. 2012). We characterized graysby hunting behavior as occurring when an individual positioned itself near a basslet (&lt;10 cm in this experiment) while directly facing the basslet (Webster 2004).</p>
<p>At the conclusion of the 10 min trial, we separated the predator from the basslets and placed the central barrier back in the tank. A new combination of basslets were placed in the glass containers, and all fish were allowed to acclimate for 20 min before removing the barrier and observing predator response for another 10 min. This procedure was repeated until all 6 basslet treatments had been presented to each predator in random order.</p>
Funding provided by NSF Division of Ocean Sciences (NSF OCE) Award Number: OCE-1233027 Award URL: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/show-award?AWD_ID=1233027
completed
Mark Hixon
University of Hawai'i
Department of Zoology 3029 Cordley Hall
Corvallis
OR
97331-2914
USA
hixonm@science.oregonstate.edu
pointOfContact
Emily Anderson
Old Dominion University
eande005@odu.edu
pointOfContact
asNeeded
Dataset Version: 1
Unknown
predator_ID
predator_species
predator_size
bass_treatment
bass_species
bass_size
hunt_time
strike_number
theme
None, User defined
sample identification
species scientific name (binomial)
fish_len
treatment
brief description
time_elapsed
count
featureType
BCO-DMO Standard Parameters
LSI_Reef_Surveys_09-12
service
Deployment Activity
Lee Stocking Island, Bahamas
place
Locations
otherRestrictions
otherRestrictions
Access Constraints: none. Use Constraints: Please follow guidelines at: http://www.bco-dmo.org/terms-use Distribution liability: Under no circumstances shall BCO-DMO be liable for any direct, incidental, special, consequential, indirect, or punitive damages that result from the use of, or the inability to use, the materials in this data submission. If you are dissatisfied with any materials in this data submission your sole and exclusive remedy is to discontinue use.
Mechanisms and Consequences of Fish Biodiversity Loss on Atlantic Coral Reefs Caused by Invasive Pacific Lionfish
http://hixon.science.oregonstate.edu/content/highlight-lionfish-invasion
Mechanisms and Consequences of Fish Biodiversity Loss on Atlantic Coral Reefs Caused by Invasive Pacific Lionfish
<p>The Pacific red lionfish (Pterois volitans), a popular aquarium fish, was introduced to the Atlantic Ocean in the vicinity of Florida in the late 20th century. Voraciously consuming small native coral-reef fishes, including the juveniles of fisheries and ecologically important species, the invader has undergone a population explosion that now ranges from the U.S. southeastern seaboard to the Gulf of Mexico and across the greater Caribbean region. The PI's past research determined that invasive lionfish (1) have escaped their natural enemies in the Pacific (lionfish are much less abundant in their native range); (2) are not yet controlled by Atlantic predators, competitors, or parasites; (3) have strong negative effects on populations of native Atlantic fishes; and (4) locally reduce the diversity (number of species) of native fishes. The lionfish invasion has been recognized as one of the major conservation threats worldwide.</p>
<p>The Bahamas support the highest abundances of invasive lionfish globally. This system thus provides an unprecedented opportunity to understand the direct and indirect effects of a major invader on a diverse community, as well as the underlying causative mechanisms. The PI will focus on five related questions: (1) How does long-term predation by lionfish alter the structure of native reef-fish communities? (2) How does lionfish predation destabilize native prey population dynamics, possibly causing local extinctions? (3) Is there a lionfish-herbivore-seaweed trophic cascade on invaded reefs? (4) How do lionfish modify cleaning mutualisms on invaded reefs? (5) Are lionfish reaching densities where natural population limits are evident? </p>
BiodiversityLossEffects_lionfish
largerWorkCitation
project
eng; USA
oceans
Lee Stocking Island, Bahamas
2017-05-16
Three Bahamian sites: 24.8318, -076.3299; 23.8562, -076.2250; 23.7727, -076.1071; Caribbean Netherlands: 12.1599, -068.2820
0
BCO-DMO catalogue of parameters from Fish species preferences by predators in the Bahamas in 2013
Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO)
Unavailable
508-289-2009
WHOI MS#36
Woods Hole
MA
02543
USA
info@bco-dmo.org
http://www.bco-dmo.org
Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm
For questions regarding this resource, please contact BCO-DMO via the email address provided.
pointOfContact
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700297.rdf
Name: predator_ID
Units: unitless
Description: <p>Identification number for each predator observed</p>
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700298.rdf
Name: predator_species
Units: unitless
Description: <p>Species of predator (CECR = Cephalopholis cruentatus; PTVO = Pterois volitans)</p>
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700299.rdf
Name: predator_size
Units: centimeters
Description: <p>Total body length of predator</p>
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700300.rdf
Name: bass_treatment
Units: unitless
Description: <p>Combination of basslets (fairy vs. blackcap basslets) presented to predator in aquarium tank: (1) GRLO.sm_GRME.lg = small fairy vs. large blackcap; (2) GRME.sm_GRLO.lg = small blackcap vs. large fairy; (3) GRLO.sm_GRME.sm = small fairy vs. small blackcap; (4) GRLO.lg_GRME.lg = large fairy vs. large blackcap</p>
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700301.rdf
Name: bass_species
Units: unitless
Description: <p>Species of focal basslet (GRLO = fairy basslet; GRME = blackcap basslet)</p>
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700302.rdf
Name: bass_size
Units: unitless
Description: <p>Size of focal basslet (small or large)</p>
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700303.rdf
Name: hunt_time
Units: seconds
Description: <p>Time predator hunted focal basslet</p>
http://lod.bco-dmo.org/id/dataset-parameter/700304.rdf
Name: strike_number
Units: count
Description: <p>Number of times predator struck at focal basslet</p>
GB/NERC/BODC > British Oceanographic Data Centre, Natural Environment Research Council, United Kingdom
Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO)
Unavailable
508-289-2009
WHOI MS#36
Woods Hole
MA
02543
USA
info@bco-dmo.org
http://www.bco-dmo.org
Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm
For questions regarding this resource, please contact BCO-DMO via the email address provided.
pointOfContact
17545
https://darchive.mblwhoilibrary.org/bitstream/1912/24247/1/dataset-700288_size-and-species-focal-basslets__v1.tsv
download
https://doi.org/10.1575/1912/bco-dmo.700288.1
download
onLine
dataset
<p>We conducted all experimental trials in 50 gallon (ca. 190 l) acrylic aquarium tanks (91.5 × 38 × 51 cm) with continuous flow-through seawater systems. Food was withheld from predators for 24 h prior to observation to ensure predator response to the presence of prey. Tanks were divided in half with a removable central barrier of solid aluminum (Fig. 1). We released a single predator into one side of the tank and placed 2 basslets in the other side. Basslets were held in identical small glass containers (~500 ml) with mesh covers (1 basslet per container) positioned in each corner of the tank. These prey containers ensured that predators were able to receive both visual and chemical cues from basslets, but could neither make physical contact nor consume any basslets.</p>
<p>To determine whether the preference of predators for basslets was driven by basslet species (fairy and blackcap) or basslet size (small and large: 1.7–2.5 and 3.5–5.2 cm TL, respectively) we presented pairs of basslets in cross-factored combinations of the 2 variables, resulting in the following treatments: (1) small fairy and large fairy, (2) small blackcap and large blackcap, (3) small fairy and small blackcap, (4) large fairy and large blackcap, (5) small fairy and large blackcap, and (6) large fairy and small blackcap. In addition to randomizing the order of basslet treatments presented to each predator, we also randomized the corner of the tank basslets were placed in every time a treatment was presented.</p>
<p>Once the predator and basslets were in their respective sides of the tank, we allowed them to acclimate for 20 min, after which we removed the central barrier and observed the predator’s behavior for 10 min. Observations were performed either in person (74 lionfish trials; 73 graysby trials) or filmed with a digital video camera (16 lionfish trials; 17 graysby trials) positioned outside of the tank. During each 10 min trial, we recorded (1) which basslet the predator hunted first (initial hunting preference); (2) the number of times the predator’s mouth made physical contact with each glass container (number of strikes); and (3) the amount of time the predator hunted each basslet (hunting time). We defined the hunting behavior of lionfish as occurring when an individual directly faced a basslet with flared pectoral fins and/or blew pulsed jets of water towards a basslet (Cure et al. 2012). We characterized graysby hunting behavior as occurring when an individual positioned itself near a basslet (&lt;10 cm in this experiment) while directly facing the basslet (Webster 2004).</p>
<p>At the conclusion of the 10 min trial, we separated the predator from the basslets and placed the central barrier back in the tank. A new combination of basslets were placed in the glass containers, and all fish were allowed to acclimate for 20 min before removing the barrier and observing predator response for another 10 min. This procedure was repeated until all 6 basslet treatments had been presented to each predator in random order.</p>
Specified by the Principal Investigator(s)
<p>When testing for significant differences in predator response between fairy versus blackcap basslets, we analyzed only the 4 treatments where predators were presented with 2 different basslet species (lionfish: n = 11; graysby: n = 11). Similarly, we analyzed the 4&nbsp;treatments where we presented predators with 2 bass lets differing in size (small versus large) when comparing predator response between basslet sizes (lionfish: n = 13, graysby: n = 12). If a predator did not display any predatory behavior during any of the 4 treatments described in the treatment groupings above, then the individual was dropped from that respective group prior to analysis (resulting in the final sample sizes reported above).</p>
<p><span style="font-size:14px"><strong>BCO-DMO Processing Notes:</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:14px">- reformatted column names to comply with BCO-DMO standards</span><br />
<span style="font-size:14px">- reformatted dates&nbsp;</span><br />
<span style="font-size:14px">- nd used to fill blank cells</span></p>
Specified by the Principal Investigator(s)
asNeeded
7.x-1.1
Biological and Chemical Oceanography Data Management Office (BCO-DMO)
Unavailable
508-289-2009
WHOI MS#36
Woods Hole
MA
02543
USA
info@bco-dmo.org
http://www.bco-dmo.org
Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:00pm
For questions regarding this resource, please contact BCO-DMO via the email address provided.
pointOfContact
Deployment: LSI_Reef_Surveys_09-12
LSI_Reef_Surveys_09-12
Tropical Marine Lab at Lee Stocking Island
laboratory
LSI_Reef_Surveys_09-12
Mark Hixon
Oregon State University
Tropical Marine Lab at Lee Stocking Island
laboratory