Impact, recovery and carryover effect of Roundup® on predator recognition in common spiny loach, Lepidocephalichthys thermalis
Understanding the negative impact of a variety of environmental contaminants on aquatic animals is essential to curb biodiversity loss and stop degradation of ecological functions. Excessive and unrestricted use of pesticides is the most serious threat to aquatic animals including amphibians and fishes. Among the known pesticides, glyphosate based formulations have been shown to have lethal effects on many aquatic organisms. However, negative effects of pesticides on crucial ecological interactions such as prey-predator interactions are relatively unknown from tropics. In many aquatic organisms, recognition of predators is based on odor signatures; and therefore any anthropogenic alteration in water chemistry has the potential to impair recognition and learning of predators. Through a series of behavioral experiments we evaluated the effect of glyphosate based herbicide (Roundup®) on the antipredator behavior of common spiny loach, Lepidocephalichthys thermalis to understand the effects of pesticide-exposure on recognition of conspecific alarm cues, and associative learning to avoid predation. We exposed common spiny loach (for 3 h or 15 days) to sub-lethal concentration (0.5 mg a.e./L) of Roundup® and subsequently with conspecific alarm cues, signaling the proximity of a predator. Unexposed prey fish showed a significant reduction in activity level in response to conspecific alarm cues. Whereas such alarm response was not observed in prey fish that were exposed to Roundup® either for 3 h or 15 days. Such lack of response could be associated with alteration of olfactory function in prey individuals. However, this inability to detect the conspecific alarm cues was found to be transient and exposed fish recovered within 2 days. In subsequent experiments, we showed that Roundup® deactivates the conspecific alarm cues thus making them unavailable for prey to evoke the response. Furthermore, Roundup® mediated degradation of conspecific alarm cues and diminished the associative learning necessary for detection of the invasive/unknown/novel predators. Overall, due to the worldwide occurrence of glyphosate in water bodies, glyphosate mediated behavioral suppression exposes the prey animals to a considerable risk of predation, both by native and non-native predators.
KeywordsPesticides Chemical cues Tilapia Sub-lethal Learning Glyphosate
We thank anonymous reviewers and subject editor for constructive comments and highly valuable suggestions on the earlier version of the manuscript. The research was supported by grants from University Grant Commission (UGC) under minor research project, file number 47-914/14 (WRO) New Delhi and Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Government of India under DBT-STAR College scheme awarded to Modern College of Arts, Science and Commerce, Ganeshkhind, Pune. We also thank Aditya Manek, Jayshree Menon, Nikhil Gaitonde, and Anuradha Batabyal for their help to improve the language quality of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable national and institutional guidelines for the care of use of animals were followed.
- Brown GE, Chivers DP (2005) Learning as an adaptive response to predation. In: Barbosa P, Castellanos I (eds) Ecology of Predator/Prey Interactions. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p 34–54Google Scholar
- Dahanukar N, Raghavan R, Ali A, Abraham R, Shaji CP (2011) The status and distribution of freshwater fishes of the Western Ghats, Chapter 3. In: Molur S Smith K,G Daniel BA Darwall WRT (eds) The Status and Distribution of Freshwater Biodiversity in the Western Ghats, India. IUCN, and Coimbatore, India: Zoo Outreach Organisation, Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland, Coimbatore, India, (compilers)Google Scholar
- Duke SO, Powles SB (2009) Glyphosate-resistant crops and weeds: now and in the future. AgBioForum 12:346–357Google Scholar
- Ferrari MCO, Wisenden BD, Chivers DP, (2010a) Chemical ecology of predator-prey interactions in aquatic ecosystems: a review and prospectus. Can J Zool 88:698–724.Google Scholar
- Gatti RC (2016) Freshwater biodiversity: a review of local and global threats. Int J Environ Res 73:887–904.Google Scholar
- Goel PK (2006) Water Pollution: causes, effects and control. New Age International, New Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
- Grube A, Donaldson D, Kiely T, Wu L (2011) Pesticides Industry Sales and Usage. Environmental Protection Agency, United States, http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/pestsales/07pestsales/market_estimates2007.pdf Google Scholar
- Hammer Ø, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeont Electron 4: 9pp. http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm
- Liney NR, Seghers BH (1975) Factors affecting the morphology and behavior of guppies in Trinidad. In: Baerends GP, Manning BeerC (eds) A functional and evolution in behaviour. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 92–118Google Scholar
- Miron D, Crestani M, Schetinger MR, Morsch VM, Baldisserotto B, Tierno MA, Moraes G, Vieira VL (2005) Effects of herbicide clomazone, quinclorac and metsulfuron methyl on acetylcholinesterase activity in the silver catfish (Rhamdia quelen) (Heptateridae). Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 61:398–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rema Devi K (2003) Freshwat er fish diversity. In: Venkataraman K (ed.) Natural aquatic ecosystems of india, thematic biodiversity strategy and action plan. Zoological Survey of India, Kolkatta.Google Scholar