Reefscapes of fear assess tradeoffs of risk and reward on coral reefs

Degradation of coral reef habitats changes the abundance and community composition of fishes due in part to changes in the ecology of fear. The ecology of fear sees the predator-prey system as a dynamic game of behavioral responses to perceived risk with population and community level consequences. We measure spatial variation in predation risk as landscapes of fear. We consider changes in predation risk with habitat quality and examine the effects of fear on coral reefs in Kāne‘ohe Bay, O‘ahu, Hawai‘i. First, we associate fish and benthic communities on patch reefs with varying degradation due to invasive algae (Euchema spp. and Kappaphycus spp.). Next, we quantify the spatio-temporal variation of risk (reefscape of fear) of a common Hawaiian fish (saddle wrasse, hīnālea lau wili, Thalassoma duperrey) across reefs of varying degradation. Finally, we assess the tradeoffs in resource availability and predation risk on these reefs. At the scale of whole reefs, saddle wrasse responded to perceived risk. Intensity of patch use (measured by giving-up densities) by wrasse indicated risky reefs. Such reefs differed in benthic and fish community composition. We demonstrated the impact of an altered reefscape of fear due to habitat degradation. Habitat degradation seems to influence the tradeoff between resource availability and safety. From wrasse abundances and their patch use behavior we can classify the reefs into categories based on risk and resource availability. Allowing fish to reveal their perceptions of habitat qualities through their behaviors provides critical information for assessing and monitoring reefs.

Ecology of Fear: Spines, Armor and Noxious Chemicals Deter Predators in Cancer and in Nature

In nature, many multicellular and unicellular organisms use constitutive defenses such as armor, spines, and noxious chemicals to keep predators at bay. These defenses render the prey difficult and/or dangerous to subdue and handle, which confers a strong deterrent for predators. The distinct benefit of this mode of defense is that prey can defend in place and continue activities such as foraging even under imminent threat of predation. The same qualitative types of armor-like, spine-like, and noxious defenses have evolved independently and repeatedly in nature, and we present evidence that cancer is no exception. Cancer cells exist in environments inundated with predator-like immune cells, so the ability of cancer cells to defend in place while foraging and proliferating would clearly be advantageous. We argue that these defenses repeatedly evolve in cancers and may be among the most advanced and important adaptations of cancers. By drawing parallels between several taxa exhibiting armor-like, spine-like, and noxious defenses, we present an overview of different ways these defenses can appear and emphasize how phenotypes that appear vastly different can nevertheless have the same essential functions. This cross-taxa comparison reveals how cancer phenotypes can be interpreted as anti-predator defenses, which can facilitate therapy approaches which aim to give the predators (the immune system) the upper hand. This cross-taxa comparison is also informative for evolutionary ecology. Cancer provides an opportunity to observe how prey evolve in the context of a unique predatory threat (the immune system) and varied environments.

Lesser of Two Evils? Foraging Choices in Response to Threats of Predation and Parasitism

Predators have documented post-encounter (density-mediated) effects on prey but their pre-encounter impacts, including behavioural alterations, can be substantial as well. While it is increasingly evident that this “ecology of fear” is important to understand for natural enemy-victim relationships, fear responses of hosts to the threat of infection by a parasite are relatively unknown. We examined larval amphibian (Lithobates pipiens) foraging choices by experimentally manipulating the presence of cues relating to predator (larval odonate) or parasite (the trematode Ribeiroia ondatrae) threats. Tadpoles avoided foraging where predator or parasite cues were present; however, they did not treat these as equal hazards. When both threats were simultaneously present, tadpoles strongly preferred to forage under the threat of parasitism compared to predation, likely driven by their relative lethality in our study. Our results indicate that altered spatial use is an important anti-parasite behaviour, and demonstrate that parasite avoidance can affect foraging in a manner similar to predators, warranting greater study of the pre-encounter effects of this enemy type.

Lesser of Two Evils? Foraging Choices in Response to Threats of Predation and Parasitism

Predators have documented post-encounter (density-mediated) effects on prey but their pre-encounter impacts, including behavioural alterations, can be substantial as well. While it is increasingly evident that this “ecology of fear” is important to understand for natural enemy-victim relationships, fear responses of hosts to the threat of infection by a parasite are relatively unknown. We examined larval amphibian (Lithobates pipiens) foraging choices by experimentally manipulating the presence of cues relating to predator (larval odonate) or parasite (the trematode Ribeiroia ondatrae) threats. Tadpoles avoided foraging where predator or parasite cues were present; however, they did not treat these as equal hazards. When both threats were simultaneously present, tadpoles strongly preferred to forage under the threat of parasitism compared to predation, likely driven by their relative lethality in our study. Our results indicate that altered spatial use is an important anti-parasite behaviour, and demonstrate that parasite avoidance can affect foraging in a manner similar to predators, warranting greater study of the pre-encounter effects of this enemy type.

Broadening the ecology of fear: non-lethal effects arise from diverse responses to predation and parasitism

Research on the ‘ecology of fear’ posits that defensive prey responses to avoid predation can cause non-lethal effects across ecological scales. Parasites also elicit defensive responses in hosts with associated non-lethal effects, which raises the longstanding, yet unresolved question of how non-lethal effects of parasites compare with those of predators. We developed a framework for systematically answering this question for all types of predator–prey and host–parasite systems. Our framework reveals likely differences in non-lethal effects not only between predators and parasites, but also between different types of predators and parasites. Trait responses should be strongest towards predators, parasitoids and parasitic castrators, but more numerous and perhaps more frequent for parasites than for predators. In a case study of larval amphibians, whose trait responses to both predators and parasites have been relatively well studied, existing data indicate that individuals generally respond more strongly and proactively to short-term predation risks than to parasitism. Apart from studies using amphibians, there have been few direct comparisons of responses to predation and parasitism, and none have incorporated responses to micropredators, parasitoids or parasitic castrators, or examined their long-term consequences. Addressing these and other data gaps highlighted by our framework can advance the field towards understanding how non-lethal effects impact prey/host population dynamics and shape food webs that contain multiple predator and parasite species.

Pandemic COVID-19, the High-Reliability Organization (HRO), and the Ecology of Fear

COVID-19 has changed the social, financial, and political environments for healthcare. Healthcare organizations have abruptly changed operations for a new environment due to pervasive threats to the organization, patients, and healthcare professionals. While the direct, infectious presence of COVID-19 as a threat would seem to cause the greatest stress to the healthcare system, perhaps the absence of the threat may cause more severe and wide-ranging problems. Ecological studies demonstrate a greater decrease in prey populations from the predator’s absence due to an “ecology of fear.” By analogy, organizations share these trait responses and can develop an organizational culture of stress or stress. HRO describes functional traits for effective operations in environments of severe threat.