Data for: Bi-modal response strategy in Daphnia to ambush predation risk
Data files
May 20, 2024 version files 13.78 MB
-
predation_data.csv
-
README.md
Abstract
Predation, a well-established major selective force, can manifest through either consumptive or non-consumptive effects. The relative impact of such effects is predicted to vary depending on the predator hunting strategy. In aquatic systems, great attention has been paid to coursing predators, such as fish, and their effects on the behaviour of zooplankton. However, less information is available regarding more ambush-style predators. To remedy this paucity, we utilised a 3D-tracking platform to record groups of Daphnia magna under control or predation risk conditions from the ambush, invertebrate predator Erythromma najas. This design allowed us to test if there are anti-predator responses in multiple metrics of swimming behaviours. Furthermore, we recorded actual predation events allowing the distinction between predator exuded info-chemicals and those produced during the predation event. We demonstrate that predation risk was greatest for those that swam at 85% of the available depth and averaged 8.1 mm/s. Examining each individuals swimming behaviour separately shows that predation risk did not exert an impact on any of the prey response metrics. Interestingly, however, we show that Daphnia conform to one of two strategies whilst under predation risk; either swim fast high up in the water column or swim slowly close to the bottom. Hence, this dichotomous behaviour is driven by strategies combining speed and depth in different constellations. As a result, our study demonstrates that Daphnia can detect the presence of a predator, but not immediately the act of predation. In a broader context, our findings highlight the importance of considering both the spatial and temporal dimensions of predation events in order correctly detect anti-predator responses.
The data here is the raw positions of each individual tracked for the above study.
README
GENERAL INFORMATION
- Title of Dataset: Data supporting 'Bi-modal response strategy in Daphnia to ambush predation risk'
Author Information
A. Principal Investigator Contact Information
Name: Marcus Lee
Institution: Lund University
Address: Ekologihuset, Slvegatan 37, 223 62, Lund, Sweden
Email: marcus.lee@biol.lu.seB. Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information
Name: Lars-Anders Hansson
Institution: Lund University
Address: Ekologihuset, Slvegatan 37, 223 62, Lund, Sweden
Email: lars-anders.hansson@biol.lu.seDate of data collection:
2023/03 - 2023/05
Geographic location of data collection:
Lund, Sweden
Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data:
Swedish Research Council (VR), Award: 2016-03552
SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION
Recommended citation for this dataset:
Lee, Marcus and Hansson, Lars-Anders (2023), Data supporting: Bi-modal response strategy in Daphnia to ambush predation risk, Dryad, Dataset, https://doi.org/
DATA & FILE OVERVIEW
File List:
A. predation_data.csv
i. Raw data of the recorded positions of each individual over five minutes, collated into a single file.Relationship between files, if important:
N/A
Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package:
This data set was collated from the raw data files produced after each recording.
These raw files are not included, however the data represented in the predation_data.csv
is simply copied into a single file for each of useAre there multiple versions of the dataset?
No
METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION
Description of methods used for collection/generation of data:
For the description of the data generation please see the associated manuscript (Bi-modal response strategy in Daphnia to ambush predation risk)
Methods for processing the data:
All recordings automatically produced an excel directly and saved. To prevent the accidental overwriting of data, each file was read into R studio and saved into a single new file (predation_data.csv). This file was then used to create the figures and conduct analyses using R Studio.
For further information regarding the collection and generation of the dataset see the associated manuscript (Bi-modal response strategy in Daphnia to ambush predation risk)
Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data:
N/A
Standards and calibration information, if appropriate:
N/A
Environmental/experimental conditions:
For further information regarding the collection and generation of the dataset see the associated manuscript (Bi-modal response strategy in Daphnia to ambush predation risk)
Describe any quality-assurance procedures performed on the data:
All data was inspected manually and cross-referenced between digital and physical records.
People involved with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission:
Marcus Lee
DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: predation_data.csv
Number of variables:
24
Number of cases/rows:
93601
Variable List:
Key = A. Variable name
a. Description
i. Unit
1. Value labels
a. Missing value code
A. ID
a. A unique file name that contains the treatment and individual information.
i.
1. Con_H_D_11_N
2. Con_H_D_12_N
3. Con_H_D_13_N
4. Con_H_D_14_N
5. Con_H_D_15_N
6. Dams_A_D_26_N
7. Dams_A_D_27_N
8. Dams_A_D_28_N
9. Dams_A_D_29_N
10. Dams_A_D_30_Y
11. Dams_A_P_31_N
12. Con_J_D_16_N
13. Con_J_D_17_N
14. Con_J_D_18_N
15. Con_J_D_19_N
16. Con_J_D_20_N
17. Dams_C_D_38_N
18. Dams_C_D_39_Y
19. Dams_C_D_40_N
20. Dams_C_D_42_N
21. Dams_C_P_43_N
22. Con_L_D_21_N
23. Con_L_D_22_N
24. Con_L_D_23_N
25. Con_L_D_24_N
26. Dams_B_D_32_N
27. Dams_B_D_33_N
28. Dams_B_D_34_N
29. Dams_B_D_35_Y
30. Dams_B_P_37_N
31. Dams_F_D_44_N
32. Dams_F_D_45_N
33. Dams_F_D_46_Y
34. Dams_F_D_47_N
35. Dams_F_D_48_N
36. Dams_F_P_49_N
37. Con_E_D_10_N
38. Con_E_D_6_N
39. Con_E_D_7_N
40. Con_E_D_8_N
41. Con_E_D_9_N
42. Dams_G_D_50_N
43. Dams_G_D_51_N
44. Dams_G_D_52_N
45. Dams_G_D_53_N
46. Dams_G_D_54_Y
47. Dams_G_P_55_N
48. Con_D_D_1_N
49. Con_D_D_2_N
50. Con_D_D_3_N
51. Con_D_D_4_N
52. Con_D_D_5_N
a.
B. Treatment
a. A factor depending on which treatment this individual was exposed to; either Control or Predation risk (Con and Dams respectively).
i.
1. Con
2. Dams
a.
C. Recording
a. Each recording has a unique identifier and refers to a group of Daphnia that were all recorded simultaneously.
i.
1. H
2. A
3. J
4. C
5. L
6. B
7. F
8. E
9. G
10. D
a.
D. Species
a. An identifier as to whether the focal individual was a Daphnia (D) or the Predator (P) in this case it was a damselfly.
i.
1. D
2. P
a.
E. Individual
a. A unique number identifier for each individual.
i.
1. 11
2. 12
3. 13
4. 14
5. 15
6. 26
7. 27
8. 28
9. 29
10. 30
11. 31
12. 16
13. 17
14. 18
15. 19
16. 20
17. 38
18. 39
19. 40
20. 42
21. 43
22. 21
23. 22
24. 23
25. 24
26. 32
27. 33
28. 34
29. 35
30. 37
31. 44
32. 45
33. 46
34. 47
35. 48
36. 49
37. 10
38. 6
39. 7
40. 8
41. 9
42. 50
43. 51
44. 52
45. 53
46. 54
47. 55
48. 1
49. 2
50. 3
51. 4
52. 5
a.
F. Predated
a. A factorial designation as to whether the focal individual was eaten during the recording. Y = eaten, N = survived.
i.
1. Y
2. N
a.
G. Track
a. A redundant identifier produced during the conversion from recording to .csv file
i.
1. 1
a.
H. Frame
a. The position in the recording. Recordings were conducted at 6 fps for five minutes.
i.
1. 1 : 1800
a.
I. Time
a. Time based on dividing the frame by 6
i. Seconds
1. Numerical
a.
J. X
a. Position in the X plane
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA (No data)
K. Z
a. Position in the Z plane
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA (No data)
L. Y
a. Position in the Y plane
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA (No data)
M. R
a. Value of redness based on the RGB colour scale
i.
1. 0 : 255
a. NA (No data)
N. G
a. Value of greeness based on the RGB colour scale
i.
1. 0 : 255
a. NA (No data)
O. B
a. Value of blueness based on the RGB colour scale
i.
1. 0 : 255
a.NA (No data)
P. QDot
a. Colour of the nanoparticles used as distinction between predators and prey, based on R, G and B values
i.
1. yellow
2. red
a.
Q. speed
a. The speed of each individual between each frame
i. mm/s
1. Numerical
a. NA
R. Distance_a
a. The average distance of each individual from individual a in this recording. Note that individual a is only an identifier for cross recording comparisons and any individual could have been individual a
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA
S. Distance_b
a. The average distance of each individual from individual b in this recording. Note that individual b is only an identifier for cross recording comparisons and any individual could have been individual b
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA
T. Distance_c
a. The average distance of each individual from individual c in this recording. Note that individual c is only an identifier for cross recording comparisons and any individual could have been individual c
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA
U. Distance_d
a. The average distance of each individual from individual d in this recording. Note that individual d is only an identifier for cross recording comparisons and any individual could have been individual d
i. mm
1. Numaerical
a. NA
V. Distance_e
a. The average distance of each individual from individual e in this recording. Note that individual e is only an identifier for cross recording comparisons and any individual could have been individual e
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA
W. Distance_f
a. The average distance of each individual from the predator (if included in the recording)
i. mm
1. Numerical
a. NA
X. pred.time
a. The time (in number of frames) until the predation event occurred.
i.
1. Numerical
a. NA
Methods
The information on collection of data is found in the associated manuscript and the only processing in is the concatenation of individual files into a single dataset, included here.
Usage notes
The data file is .cs so may be opend and read by many different applications depending on the users preference.