Behavioural responses to predator chemical cues and local variation in antipredator performance in Rana temporaria tadpoles

By A. Laurila. 2000

101 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Body shape, burst speed and escape behavior of larval anurans (2005, unknown): “…of larval anurans when reared with predators (Smith and Van Buskirk 1995, McCollum and Leimberger 1997, Lardner 2000, Relyea and Hoverman 2003, Laurila et al. 2004, Relyea 2004, Teplitsky et al. 2004, 2005, Kishida .and Nishimura, 2005) and increases the probability of surviving predation…”
Chemically Mediated Strategies to Counter Predation (2003, background): “, 2000), amphibians (Griffiths et al., 1998; Laurila, 2000), insects (Huhta et al.”
Vulnerability of Southwest Iberian amphibians to an introduced crayfish, Procambarus clarkii (2005, unknown): “Many authors have reported prey behavioural responses to a predator presence caused either by direct intimidation (Eklöv and Werner, 2000) or by chemical cues (Kats et al., 1988; Laurila, 2000; Nyström and Abjörnsson, 2000).”
Innate and Learned Predator Recognition Mediated by Chemical Signals in Eurycea nana (2008, background): “Innate predator recognition can result from the co-evolution of prey and predator and is advantageous because an encounter with a predator is not required for naı̈ve prey to respond adaptively to predatory threats (Laurila 2000).”