Testing the Impact of Prey Presentation Method on the Feeding Kinematics of Terrestrial and Aquatic Ambystomatidae

In animal behavior, standardizing experimental protocols ensures a rigorous interpretation of the results. However, when working with multisource data, homogeneous standardization is often difficult to attain. This is the case for many studies on feeding kinematics where experimental protocols are carried out using similar but not identical methods. In particular, the impact of the way in which prey is presented remains poorly tested and understood. The aim of this study is to assess whether prey position and the way prey is presented have an impact on the kinematics of prey capture. To do so, we compared the feeding kinematics during the capture of prey presented on the substrate versus prey suspended from tweezers using closely related species of aquatic and terrestrial salamanders. Our results show that changes in prey presentation method directly impact suction feeding kinematics but not terrestrial feeding. In the case of suction feeding, when the prey is suspended by tweezers, mouth opening movements are wider and take more time, the maximum speed and acceleration of mouth opening are higher, and head angle is larger. These changes in kinematics are interpreted as behavioral responses to hydrodynamic changes caused by the different prey presentation methods. This differential sensitivity to prey presentation method between aquatic and terrestrial feeding also highlights differences in the underlying control mechanism: while terrestrial feeding appears to rely on feedback mechanisms, aquatic feeding appears to rely mostly on feedforward mechanisms. As a result, the importance of accounting for prey presentation method is likely context-dependent, being more relevant when studying feeding systems that rely on feedforward control. Finally, when comparing aquatic and terrestrial feeding, the differences in feeding strategies due to the medium itself outweigh the effects of the prey presentation method.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A Ecological and Integrative Physiology
Published
2025-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.70028
Primary Topic
Zebrafish Biomedical Research Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Testing the Impact of Prey Presentation Method on the Feeding Kinematics of Terrestrial and Aquatic Ambystomatidae

Morgane Fournier, Julien Clavel, Vivien Louppe, Anne‐Claire Fabre et al.
Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A Ecological and Integrative Physiology
Zebrafish Biomedical Research Applications
article

Testing the Impact of Prey Presentation Method on the Feeding Kinematics of Terrestrial and Aquatic Ambystomatidae

Morgane Fournier, Julien Clavel, Vivien Louppe, Anne‐Claire Fabre, Anthony Herrel, Isabelle Toussaint‐Lardé
article en

Abstract

In animal behavior, standardizing experimental protocols ensures a rigorous interpretation of the results. However, when working with multisource data, homogeneous standardization is often difficult to attain. This is the case for many studies on feeding kinematics where experimental protocols are carried out using similar but not identical methods. In particular, the impact of the way in which prey is presented remains poorly tested and understood. The aim of this study is to assess whether prey position and the way prey is presented have an impact on the kinematics of prey capture. To do so, we compared the feeding kinematics during the capture of prey presented on the substrate versus prey suspended from tweezers using closely related species of aquatic and terrestrial salamanders. Our results show that changes in prey presentation method directly impact suction feeding kinematics but not terrestrial feeding. In the case of suction feeding, when the prey is suspended by tweezers, mouth opening movements are wider and take more time, the maximum speed and acceleration of mouth opening are higher, and head angle is larger. These changes in kinematics are interpreted as behavioral responses to hydrodynamic changes caused by the different prey presentation methods. This differential sensitivity to prey presentation method between aquatic and terrestrial feeding also highlights differences in the underlying control mechanism: while terrestrial feeding appears to rely on feedback mechanisms, aquatic feeding appears to rely mostly on feedforward mechanisms. As a result, the importance of accounting for prey presentation method is likely context-dependent, being more relevant when studying feeding systems that rely on feedforward control. Finally, when comparing aquatic and terrestrial feeding, the differences in feeding strategies due to the medium itself outweigh the effects of the prey presentation method.

Journal of Experimental Zoology Part A Ecological and Integrative PhysiologyVol. 343(10)
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 (FR), University of Bern (CH), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Natural History Museum (GB), University of Antwerp (BE), Ghent University (BE), Natural History Museum of Bern (CH), Mécanismes Adaptatifs et Evolution (FR)
European Commission, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Horizon 2020 Framework Programme, H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Zebrafish Biomedical Research Applications
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.