Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35852826›Full record

ArticleeLife2022

Both prey and predator features predict the individual predation risk and survival of schooling prey.

Jolle Wolter Jolles, Matthew M G Sosna, Geoffrey P F Mazué, Colin R Twomey, Joseph Bak-Coleman, Daniel I Rubenstein, Iain D Couzin

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Coevolutionary attack and avoidance strategies in predators and grouping prey.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A multi-scale review of the dynamics of collective behaviour: from rapid responses to ontogeny and evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  10. Inferring social influence in animal groups across multiple timescales.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Jolle Wolter JollesDepartment of Collective Behaviour, Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Konstanz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9905-2633
Matthew M G SosnaDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States.
Geoffrey P F MazuéSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Colin R TwomeyDepartment of Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States.
Joseph Bak-ColemaneScience Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, United States.
Daniel I RubensteinDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, United States.
Iain D CouzinDepartment of Collective Behaviour, Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Konstanz, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8556-4558
Princeton University · USUniversity of Konstanz · DEThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Pennsylvania · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Predation is one of the main evolutionary drivers of social grouping. While it is well appreciated that predation risk is likely not shared equally among individuals within groups, its detailed quantification has remained difficult due to the speed of attacks and the highly dynamic nature of collective prey response. Here, using high-resolution tracking of solitary predators (Northern pike) hunting schooling fish (golden shiners), we not only provide insights into predator decision-making, but show which key spatial and kinematic features of predator and prey predict the risk of individuals to be targeted and to survive attacks. We found that pike tended to stealthily approach the largest groups, and were often already inside the school when launching their attack, making prey in this frontal 'strike zone' the most vulnerable to be targeted. From the prey's perspective, those fish in central locations, but relatively far from, and less aligned with, neighbours, were most likely to be targeted. While the majority of attacks were successful (70%), targeted individuals that did manage to avoid being captured exhibited a higher maximum acceleration response just before the attack and were further away from the pike's head. Our results highlight the crucial interplay between predators' attack strategy and response of prey underlying the predation risk within mobile animal groups.

Indexed as

FishesPredatory BehaviorAnimalscollective behaviourecologygolden shinergroupingpikepredationpredator-prey

Identifiers

PMID35852826
PMCPMC9348852
OpenAlexW4285797947

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.