English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Prey animals use various signals to detect their predators and respond accordingly to enhance their survival. Since responding to a predator is costly, prey species may cut cost by using other strategies such as behavioural tactics, morphological changes, seeking natural refuge or unique habitat acquisition. Tadpoles of  Microhyla nilphamariensis  have a transparent body and live in a neustonic environment, which provides them protection against benthic predators. As a result, we investigated the predator detection mechanism in  M. nilphamariensis  tadpoles using different cues from an insect predator, dragonfly larvae, to determine if the presence of natural shelter and unique habitat acquisition influences the chemo-ecology of predator recognition in this species. We also exposed these tadpoles to active caged predators and a stress hormone, corticosterone (CORT) to study physiological mechanism underlying their behavioural anti-predator responses toward alarm cues. In the predator avoidance assay,  M. nilphamariensis  tadpoles did not respond to the predator using visual or chemical signals. The tadpoles did not change their activity in response to alarm, heterospecific, kairomones, and dietary cues released from the predator. Pre-conditioning of  M. nilphamariensis  tadpoles with caged predator and different concentrations of CORT also did not alter their activity in response to alarm cues. These results clearly demonstrated that neustonic tadpoles of  M. nilphamariensis  do not detect and respond to co-existing insect predator. We discuss these results in the context of unique habitat occupied by these prey tadpoles, the presence of alternate prey, and inherent factors such as transparent body.

Neustonic tadpoles do not detect and respond to insect predator