Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of strike and prey capture kinematics of three species of piscivorous fishes: Florida gar (Lepisosteus platyrhincus), redfin needlefish (Strongylura notata), and great barracuda (Sphyraena barracuda)

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Marine Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ram feeding is the process by which a predatory fish uses a high-velocity lunge or chase to overtake its prey. This study compares the strike and prey capture behaviors and kinematics of three species of ram-feeding fishes: Florida gar Lepisosteus platyrhincus, redfin needlefish Strongylura notata, and great barracuda Sphyraena barracuda. These ram-feeding piscivores are morphologically similar with fusiform bodies, posteriorly placed dorsal and anal fins, and large, conical teeth. Strike and prey capture kinematics for five individuals of each species were recorded with high-speed video. Pre-strike behavior in L. platyrhincus consists of a slow stalk, resulting in the close, lateral positioning of the predator’s head relative to the prey. Lepisosteus employ a sideways lunge of the head during the strike, which lasts only 25–40 ms and is the most rapid strike among these three species. Strongylura notata and Sphyraena barracuda exhibit longitudinal orientation to the prey before the strike, followed by a high velocity, head-on lunge, initiated by an s-start in Sphyraena barracuda. Prey capture in adult L. platyrhincus and Strongylura notata is characterized by the jaws closing on the prey, with the prey held orthogonal to the jaws. This is followed by manipulation using the inertia of the prey to reposition the prey head first, and then suction transport into the buccal cavity. Prey capture in juvenile Sphyraena is accomplished by closing the jaws after the prey has entered the buccal cavity, resulting in possible ram transport of the prey with no oral manipulation under these experimental conditions. Although these three species all employ ram feeding for prey capture of elusive prey, each species has a unique repertoire that appears to minimize hydrodynamic constraints and prey response, utilize locomotory capabilities, and may be suited to each species’ specific habitat.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2a–e
Fig. 3a–d
Fig. 4a–f
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bergert BA, Wainwright PC (1997) Morphology and kinematics of prey capture in the sygnathid fishes Hippocampus erectus and Syngnathus floridae. Mar Biol 127:563–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busbey AB III (1989) Form and function of the feeding apparatus of Alligator mississippiensis. J Morphol 202:99–127

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cabin RJ, Mitchell RJ (2000) To Bonferroni or not to Bonferroni: when and how are the questions. Bull Ecol Soc Am 81:246–248

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr WES, Adams CA (1973) Food habits of juvenile marine fishes occupying seagrass beds in the estuarine zone near Crystal River, Florida. Trans Am Fish Soc 102:511–540

    Google Scholar 

  • Cleuren J, de Vree F (1992) Kinematics of the jaw and hyolingual apparatus during feeding in Caiman crocodilus. J Morphol 212:141–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Crumpton J (1970) Food habits of longnose gar (Lepisosteus osseus) and Florida gar (Lepisosteus platyrhincus) collected from five central Florida lakes. Proc Annu Conf Southeast Assoc Game Fish Comm 24:419–424

    Google Scholar 

  • Cundall D, Gans C (1979) Feeding in water snakes: an electromyographic study. J Exp Zool 209:189–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Curio E (1976) The ethology of predation. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  • Dill LM (1974) The escape response of the zebra danio (Brachydanio rerio) I. The stimulus for escape. Anim Behav 22:711–722

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferry-Graham LA, Wainwright PC, Bellwood DR (2001a) Prey capture in long-jawed butterflyfishes (Chaetodontidae): the functional basis of novel feeding habits. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 256:167–184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferry-Graham LA, Wainwright PC, Hulsey CD, Bellwood DR (2001b) Evolution and mechanics of long jaws in butterflyfishes (Family Chaetodontidae). J Morphol 248:120–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foster NR (1973) Behavior, development, early life history of Asian needlefish, Xenentodon cancila. Acad Nat Sci Phila Proc 125:77–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Goulding M, Carvalho ML (1984) Ecology of Amazonian needlefishes (Belonidae). Rev Bras Zool 3:99–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory WK (1933) Fish skulls: a study of the evolution of natural mechanisms. Trans Am Philos Soc 23:75–468

    Google Scholar 

  • Harper DG, Blake RW (1991) Prey capture and the fast-start performance of northern pike Esox lucius. J Exp Biol 155:175–192

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiatt RW, Strasburg DW (1960) Relationships of the fish fauna on coral reefs of the Marshall Islands. Biol Monogr 30:65–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobson ES (1974) Feeding relationships of teleostean fishes on coral reefs in Kona, Hawaii. Fish Bull 72:915–1031

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt BP (1953) Food relationships between Florida spotted gar and other organisms in the Tamiami Canal, Dade County, Florida. Trans Am Fish Soc 82:13–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauder GV (1980) Evolution of the feeding mechanism in primitive actinopterygian fishes: a functional anatomical analysis of Polypterus, Lepisosteus, and Amia. J Morphol 163:283–317

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauder GV, Liem KF (1981) Prey capture by Luciocephalus pulcher: implications for models of jaw protrusion in teleost fishes. Environ Biol Fish 6:257–268

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauder GV, Norton SF (1979) Asymmetrical muscle activity during feeding in the gar, Lepisosteus oculatus. J Exp Biol 84:17–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauder GV, Prendergast T (1992) Kinematics of aquatic prey capture in the snapping turtle Chelydra serpentina. J Exp Biol 164:55–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeuwan JL van, Muller M (1984) Optimum sucking techniques for predatory fish. Zool Soc Lond 37:137–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao J (2001) Locomotion in needlefish: anguilliform swimming with fins. Am Zool 40:1103

    Google Scholar 

  • Liem KF (1978) Modulatory multiplicity in the functional repertoire of the feeding mechanism in cichlid fishes. I. Piscivores. J Morphol 158:323–360

    Google Scholar 

  • Liem KF (1980) Aquisition of energy by teleosts: adaptive mechanisms and evolutionary patterns. In: Ali MA (ed) Environmental physiology of fishes. Plenum, New York, pp 57–91

  • Long JH Jr, Hale ME, McHenry MJ, Westneat MW (1996) Functions of fish skin: fluxural stiffness and steady swimming of longnose gar Lepisosteus osseus. J Exp Biol 199:2139–2151

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moran MD (2003) Arguments for rejecting the sequentail Bonferroni in ecological studies. Oikos 100:403–405

    Google Scholar 

  • Motta PJ (1984) Mechanics and functions of jaw protrusion in teleost fishes: a review. Copeia 1984:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Motta PJ (2004) Prey capture behavior and feeding mechanics of elasmobranchs. In: Carrier JC, Musick JA, Heithaus MR (eds) Biology of sharks and their relatives. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla., pp 165–202

  • Motta PJ, Wilga CD (2001) Advances in the study of feeding behaviors, mechanisms, and mechanics of sharks. Environ Biol Fish 60:131–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motta PJ, Trikas TC, Hueter RE, Summers AP (1997) Feeding mechanism and functional morphology of the jaws of the lemon shark, Negaprion brevirostris (Chondrichthyes, Carcharhinidae). J Exp Biol 200:2765–2780

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton SF (1991) Capture success and diet of cottid fishes: the role of predator morphology and attack kinematics. Ecology 72:1807–1819

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton SF (1995) A functional approach to ecomorphological patterns of feeding in cottid fishes. Environ Biol Fish 44:61–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton SF, Brainerd EL (1993) Convergence in the feeding mechanics of ecomorphologically similar species in the Centrarchidae and Cichlidae. J Exp Biol 176:11–29

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand DM, Lauder GV (1980) Prey capture in the chain pickerel, Esox niger: correlations between feeding and locomotor behavior. Can J Zool 59:1072–1078

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall JE (1967) Food habits of reef fishes of the West Indies. Stud Trop Oceanogr 5:665–847

    Google Scholar 

  • Reilly SM, Lauder GV (1992) Morphology, behavior, and evolution: comparative kinematics of aquatic feeding salamanders. Brain Behav Evol 40:182–196

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson SL, Cech JJ, Cheer AY (1994) Paddlefish buccal flow velocity during ram suspension feeding and ram ventilation. J Exp Biol 186:145–156

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sass GG, Motta PJ (2002) The effects of satiation on strike mode and prey capture kinematics in the largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides. Environ Biol Fish 65:441–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seidensticker EP (1987) Food selection of alligator gar and longnose gar in a Texas reservoir. Proc Annu Conf Southeast Assoc Fish Wildl Agencies 41:100–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Springer VG, Woodburn KD (1960) An ecological study of the fishes of Tampa Bay area. Fla State Bd Conserv Mar Lab Prof Pap 1:1–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Summers AP, Darouian KF, Richmond AM, Brainerd EL (1998) Kinematics of aquatic and terrestrial prey capture in Terrapene carolina, with implications for the evolution of feeding in cryptodire turtles. J Exp Zool 281:280–287

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sylva D de (1963) Systematics and life history of the Great Barracuda, Sphyraena barracuda. Studies in Tropical Oceanography, Miami, University of Miami, Miami, Fla.

  • Vogel S (1994) Life in moving fluids. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.

  • Wainwright PC, Ferry-Graham LA, Waltzek TB, Carroll AM, Hulsey CD, Grubich JR (2001) Evaluating the use of ram and suction during prey capture by cichlid fishes. J Exp Biol 204:3039–3051

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Webb PW (1978) Fast-start performance and body form in seven species of teleost fish. J Exp Biol 74:211–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb PW (1982) Avoidence responses of fathead minnow to strikes by four teleost predators. J Comp Physiol 147A:371–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb PW (1984a) Form and function in fish swimming. Sci Am 251:72–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb PW (1984b) Body form, locomotion, and foraging in aquatic vertebrates. Am Zool 24:107–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb PW (1984c) Body and fin form and strike tactics of four teleost predators attacking a fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) prey. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 41:157–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb PW, Skadsen JM (1980) Strike tactics of Esox. Can J Zool 58:1462–1469

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Webb PW, Hardy DH, Mehl VL (1992) The effect of armored skin on the swimming of longnose gar, Lepisosteus osseus. Can J Zool 70:1173–1179

    Google Scholar 

  • Weihs D, Katzir G (1994) Bill sweeping in the spoonbill, Platalea leucordia: evidence for hydrodynamic function. Anim Behav 47:649–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilga CAD (1997) Evolution of feeding mechanisms in elasmobranchs: a functional morphological approach. PhD dissertation, University of South Florida, Fla.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilga CD, Motta PJ (1998) Conservation and variation in the feeding mechanism of the spiny dogfish Squalus acanthias. J Exp Biol 201:1345–1358

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilga CD, Motta PJ (2000) Durophagy in sharks: feeding mechanics of the hammerhead Sphyrna tiburo. J Exp Biol 203:2781–2796

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of time, materials, and assistance provided by R. Turingan, S. Bell, B. Cowell, D. Sasko, M. Robinson, M. Pretlow-Edmonds, G. Bergmann, M. Dean, D. Huber, D. Lowry, M. Matott, R. Myers, and M. Maloney. The University of South Florida provided facilities and equipment. Specimen collections were made possible in part by the facilities of the Florida Institute of Oceanography’s Keys Marine Laboratory. Equipment used in this research was supported by National Science Foundation Grants DEB 9117371 and IBN 9807863 to P.J.M. Experiments conducted during this study were approved by IACUC and comply with current U.S. laws.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Heather T. Porter

    Present address: Florida Marine Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 100 8th Avenue SE, St. Petersburg, FL 33701, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of South Florida, 4202 East Fowler Avenue, Tampa, FL 33620, USA

    Heather T. Porter & Philip J. Motta

Authors
  1. Heather T. Porter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philip J. Motta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heather T. Porter.

Additional information

Communicated by P.W. Sammarco, Chauvin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Porter, H.T., Motta, P.J. A comparison of strike and prey capture kinematics of three species of piscivorous fishes: Florida gar (Lepisosteus platyrhincus), redfin needlefish (Strongylura notata), and great barracuda (Sphyraena barracuda). Marine Biology 145, 989–1000 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-004-1380-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-004-1380-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation