Apparent death

Last updated
A Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) playing dead Opossum2.jpg
A Virginia opossum (Didelphis virginiana) playing dead
A barred grass snake (Natrix helvetica) playing dead Grass Snake (Natrix natrix helvetica) playing dead (14178349634).jpg
A barred grass snake (Natrix helvetica) playing dead

Apparent death [lower-alpha 1] is a behavior in which animals take on the appearance of being dead. It is an immobile state most often triggered by a predatory attack and can be found in a wide range of animals from insects and crustaceans to mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. [1] [5] [2] Apparent death is separate from the freezing behavior seen in some animals. [1] [2]

Contents

Apparent death is a form of animal deception considered to be an anti-predator strategy, but it can also be used as a form of aggressive mimicry. When induced by humans, the state is sometimes colloquially known as animal hypnosis. The earliest written record of "animal hypnosis" dates back to the year 1646 in a report by Athanasius Kircher, in which he subdued chickens. [6]

Description

PhyllomedusaBurmeisteri (6).JPG
Burmeister's leaf frog playing dead
ApusApusKlausRoggel02.jpg
Young common swift
Iridomyrmex purpureus attacking Rhytidoponera metallica.jpg
Black house ants attacking a green-head ant which has gone into tonic immobility

Tonic immobility (also known as the act of feigning death, or exhibiting thanatosis) is a behaviour in which some animals become apparently temporarily paralysed and unresponsive to external stimuli. Tonic immobility is most generally considered to be an anti-predator behavior because it occurs most often in response to an extreme threat such as being captured by a (perceived) predator. Some animals use it to attract prey or facilitate reproduction. For example, in sharks exhibiting the behaviour, some scientists relate it to mating, arguing that biting by the male immobilizes the female and thus facilitates mating. [7]

Despite appearances, some animals remain conscious throughout tonic immobility. [8] Evidence for this includes the occasional responsive movement, scanning of the environment and animals in tonic immobility often taking advantage of escape opportunities. Tonic immobility is preferred in the literature because it has neutral connotations compared to 'thanatosis' which has a strong association with death. [1] [2]

Difference from freezing

Tonic immobility is different from freezing behavior in animals. [1] [2] A deer in headlights and an opossum "playing dead" are common examples of an animal freezing and playing dead, respectively. Freezing occurs early during a predator-prey interaction when the prey detects and identifies the threat, but the predator has not yet seen the prey. [1] Because freezing occurs before detection and is used to better camouflage the prey and prevent the predator from attacking, it is considered a primary defense mechanism. [2]

Tonic immobility occurs after the predator has detected and or made contact with the prey, and is likely used to prevent further attack by the predator or consumption of the prey. [1] [2] Because tonic immobility occurs later in the predator attack sequence, it is considered a secondary defense mechanism and is therefore distinct from freezing. [1] [2] Although freezing animals become rigid, they often stay upright and do not change their posture while frozen whereas during tonic immobility, animals often become rigid and change their posture. [1] [2] [4]

Freezing behavior and tonic immobility are similar in that both may induce bradycardia (slowing of the heart rate), but the freezing response may instead be accompanied by rapid or increased breathing rate, increased heart rate, increased blood pressure and inhibition of digestion, depending on whether the sympathetic or parasympathetic nervous system is engaged. [9] In contrast, along with bradycardia, vertebrates in tonic immobility often reduce their breathing rate or protrude their tongue, further distinguishing this behavior from the freezing response. [1]

Defensive

For defensive purposes, thanatosis hinges on the pursuer's becoming unresponsive to its victim, as most predators only catch live prey. [10]

In beetles, artificial selection experiments have shown that there is heritable variation for length of death-feigning. Those selected for longer death-feigning durations are at a selective advantage to those at shorter durations when a predator is introduced, [11] which suggests that thanatosis is indeed adaptive.

In the hog-nosed snake, a threatened individual rolls onto its back and appears to be dead when threatened by a predator, while a foul-smelling, volatile fluid oozes from its body. Predators, such as cats, then lose interest in the snake, which both looks and smells dead. One reason for their loss of interest is that rotten-smelling animals are instinctively avoided as a precaution against infectious disease, so the snake's adaptions exploit that reaction. Newly hatched young also instinctively show this behaviour when rats try to eat them. [12]

In mammals, the Virginia opossum (commonly known simply as possums) is perhaps the best known example of defensive thanatosis. "Playing possum" is an idiomatic phrase which means "pretending to be dead". [13] It comes from a characteristic of the Virginia opossum, which is famous for reacting with a death-like posture when threatened. [14] [15] This instinct does not always pay off in the modern world; for example, opossums scavenging roadkill may react with the death-like posture to the threat posed by oncoming traffic, and subsequently end up as roadkill themselves. [16] "Playing possum" can also mean simply pretending to be injured, unconscious, asleep, or otherwise vulnerable, often to lure an opponent into a vulnerable position. [13]

The usual advice for humans attempting to survive an attack by a brown bear is to lie face down, cover the face with one's hands/arms/elbows, and 'play dead'. This is done with the hope that the bear will get bored and wander away after a while. [17]

Thanatosis has also been observed in many invertebrates such as the wasp Nasonia vitripennis , [18] and the cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus . [19]

Reproductive

In the spider species Pisaura mirabilis , male spiders often stage elaborate rituals of gift-giving and thanatosis to avoid getting eaten by female spiders during mating. Studies have shown higher chances of success in mating with females for males who exhibit death-feigning more frequently than for males who do it less. [20]

Predatory

Cichlids of the genus Nimbochromis use thanatosis as a form of aggressive mimicry, playing dead to attract prey Adult male livingstonii.png
Cichlids of the genus Nimbochromis use thanatosis as a form of aggressive mimicry, playing dead to attract prey

Nimbochromis (sleeper cichlids), endemic to Lake Malawi in East Africa, are large predatory fish for whom thanatosis is a form of aggressive mimicry. This fish will lie down on its side on the bottom sediments and assume a blotchy coloration. Scavengers, attracted to what seems like a dead fish, will approach the predator to investigate. N. livingstoni then abandons the thanatosis, righting itself again and quickly eating any scavenger unfortunate enough to come too close. [21] [22] A similar strategy has also been observed in the African cichlid Lamprologus lemairii from Lake Tanganyika [23] and in the Central American yellowjacket cichlid Parachromis friedrichsthalii . [24]

Examples

Invertebrates

A Brown widow spider resorting to thanatosis after being shaken from her web Latrodectus geometricus female in thanatosis.JPG
A Brown widow spider resorting to thanatosis after being shaken from her web

Within the invertebrates, tonic immobility is widespread throughout phylum Arthropoda and has been demonstrated to occur in beetles, moths, mantids, cicadas, crickets, spiders, wasps, bees, and ants. [2] [20] [25] [26] [27] [28]

Wasps

Tonic immobility has been observed in several species of parasitoid wasp and is considered to be an antipredator behavior in these insects. [25] [28] In wasps, tonic immobility can be induced by tapping their antennae, tapping the abdomen repeatedly, or squeezing their abdomen. [25] [28] A study in 2020 found that the frequency and duration of tonic immobility was affected by the sex of the wasp and the temperature of the environment, but not the color of the background the wasp was on. [25] These results were consistent with a study in 2006 that found no effect of background color on tonic immobility in a different wasp species, Nasonia vitripennis. [28]

Fire ants

In fire ant colonies, tonic immobility is used by young workers to avoid conflict with competing ants. [27] In the fire ant species Solenopsis invicta, the tendency to exhibit thanatosis decreases with age, with older ants choosing to fight with any workers from neighboring colonies. [27] By using tonic immobility to evade conflict, the researchers found that the young ants were four times more likely to survive an attack compared to their older counterparts, despite being more vulnerable due to their softer exoskeletons. [27]

Spiders

In the nuptial gift-giving spider, thanatosis is incorporated into their mating display. [20] A study in 2008 demonstrated that male Pisaura mirabilis spiders who displayed thanatosis were more likely to copulate with females and copulated longer. [20]

Green Lacewings

Larvae of Chrysoperla plorabunda engage in tonic immobility when they come into close proximity with a predator. [29] Usage of tonic immobility as an antipredator strategy has been shown to vary with energy availability and within-population genetic variation, with lacewings under energetic stress being more likely to engage in tonic immobility. [29]

Vertebrates

Tonic immobility has been observed in a large number of vertebrate taxa, including sharks, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals.

Sharks

Some sharks can be induced into tonic immobility by inverting them and restraining them by hand, e.g. dogfish sharks, lemon sharks, whitetip reef sharks. [7] [30] [31] [32] For tiger sharks (measuring 3–4 metres in length), tonic immobility can be induced by humans placing their hands lightly on the sides of the animal's snout in the area surrounding the eyes. During tonic immobility in sharks, the dorsal fins straighten, and both breathing[ disputed – discuss ] and muscle contractions become more steady and relaxed. This state persists for an average of 15 minutes before recovery and the resumption of active behaviour. Scientists have exploited this response to study shark behaviour; chemical shark repellent has been studied to test its effectiveness and to more accurately estimate dose sizes, concentrations and time to recovery. [33] Tonic immobility can also be used as a form of mild anesthesia during experimental manipulations of sharks. [34] [35]

Scientists also believe that tonic immobility can be a stressful experience for sharks. By measuring blood chemistry samples when the shark is immobile, it has been suggested that tonic immobility can actually put stress on the shark, and reduce breathing efficiency. Others think sharks have a series of compensatory mechanisms that work to increase respiration rates and lower stress. [36]

It has been observed that orcas can exploit sharks' tonic immobility to prey on large sharks. Some orcas ram sharks from the side to stun them, then flip the sharks to induce tonic immobility and keep them in such state for sustained time. For some sharks, this prevents water from flowing through their gills and the result can be fatal. [37]

Teleost fishes

Goldfish, trout, rudd, tench, brown bullhead, medaka, paradise fish, and topminnow have been reported to go limp when they are restrained on their backs. [38] Oscars seem to go into shock when they are stressed (when their aquarium is being cleaned, for example): they lie on their side, stop moving their fins, start to breathe more slowly and deeply, and lose colour. [39] A similar behavior has been reported for convict tangs in the field. [40]

An eastern hog-nosed snake playing dead and regurgitating a toad Heterodon platirhinos 2.jpg
An eastern hog-nosed snake playing dead and regurgitating a toad

Amphibians and reptiles

Tonic immobility can be found in several families of anurans (frogs and toads). [41] In anurans, tonic immobility is demonstrated by most often with open eyes and the limbs sprawled and easy to move, but some species keep their eyes closed. [41] Some species also protrude their tongue. [41]

Tonic immobility has also been observed in several species of lizards and snakes. [42] [43] The most common example of tonic immobility in the latter is the North American hog-nose snake, but it has also been observed in grass snakes. [42] Tonic immobility can be reliably induced in iguanas by a combination of inversion, restraint and moderate pressure. During tonic immobility, there are obvious changes in respiration including a decline in respiration rate, the rhythm becomes sporadic, and the magnitude irregular. The prolonged period of tonic immobility does not seem to be consistent with the fear hypothesis, but could be the result of a period of cortical depression due to increased brain stem activity. [44]

Tonic immobility can also be induced in the Carolina anole. The characteristics of this tonic immobility vary as a function of the duration and condition of captivity. [45]

Chickens

Tonic immobility can be induced in chickens, but the behavior is more colloquially referred to as hypnosis. [46] [47]

Tonic immobility can be induced in chickens through several means, including by gently restraining them on their side, stomach, or back for a short period of time, or by using chalk to draw a line on the ground away from the chicken's beak while restraining them with their head down. [46] [48] Chickens have been used in several studies to elucidate the genetic basis of tonic immobility. While early studies focused on determining whether tonic immobility was influenced by genetics, a study in 2019 identified five genes that potentially control tonic immobility in white leghorn chickens and red junglefowl. [47] [49] [50]

Ducks

Tonic immobility has been observed in several species of ducks as an effective anti-predatory response. A study by Sargeant and Eberhardt (1975) determined that ducks who feigned death had a better chance at surviving a fox attack than those who resisted and struggled. [51] Despite being immobile the ducks remained conscious and were aware of opportunities for escape. Although the researchers concluded that tonic immobility was an effective anti-predator response, they conceded that it would not be useful against predators that kill or fatally injure prey immediately after capture. [51]

Rabbits

Tonic immobility occurs in both domestic and wild species of rabbit and can be induced by placing and restraining the animal for a short period of time. [52] As in other prey animals, tonic immobility is considered to be an antipredator behavior in rabbits. [53] Studies on tonic immobility in rabbits focus on the European rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus, but other species of rabbit have been studied.

A laboratory experiment by Ewell, Cullen, and Woodruff (1981) provided support to the hypothesis that European rabbits use tonic immobility as an anti-predator response. [54] The study found that how quickly the rabbits "righted" themselves (i.e. how quickly they came out of tonic immobility) depended on how far a predator was away from the rabbit, and how close the rabbit was to their home cage. [54] Rabbits that were closer to their home cage righted themselves more quickly than those that were farther from their home cage. Conversely, when predators were closer to the rabbits, they took longer to right themselves. [54] These results were consistent with those found in studies on chickens, lizards, and blue crabs at the time, and provided support that rabbits use tonic immobility as an antipredator response. [54]

A more recent study on European rabbits monitored their heart rate during tonic immobility and found several physiological changes to the cardiovascular system during this state, including a decrease in heart rate. [53]

Humans

Tonic immobility has been hypothesized to occur in humans undergoing intense trauma, including sexual assault. [55] [56] [57]

There is also an increasing body of evidence that points to a positive contribution of tonic immobility in human functioning. Thus, defensive immobilization is hypothesized to have played a crucial role in the evolution of human parent-child attachment, [58] sustained attention and suggestibility, [59] [60] REM sleep [61] and theory of mind. [62]

Induction

Tonic immobility is considered to be a fear-potentiated response induced by physical restraint and characterised by reduced responsiveness to external stimulation. It has been used as a measure in the assessment of animal welfare, particularly hens, since 1970. [63] [64] [65] The rationale for the tonic immobility test is that the experimenter simulates a predator, thereby eliciting the anti-predator response. The precept is that the prey animal 'pretends' to be dead to be able to escape when/if the predator relaxes its concentration. Death-feigning birds often take advantage of escape opportunities; tonic immobility in quail reduces the probability of the birds being predated by cats. [66]

To induce tonic immobility, the animal is gently restrained on its side or back for a period of time, e.g. 15 seconds. This is done either on a firm, flat surface or sometimes in a purpose-built V- or U-shaped restraining cradle. In rodents, the response is sometimes induced by additionally pinching or attaching a clamp to the skin at the nape of the neck. [67] Scientists record behaviours such as the number of inductions (15-second restraining periods) required for the animal to remain still, the latency to the first major movements (often cycling motions of the legs), latency to first head or eye movements and the duration of immobility, sometimes called the 'righting time'.

Tonic immobility has been used to show that hens in cages are more fearful than those in pens, [65] hens on the top tier of tiered battery cages are more fearful than those on the lower levels, [68] hens carried by hand are more fearful than hens carried on a mechanical conveyor, [69] and hens undergoing longer transportation times are more fearful than those undergoing transport of a shorter duration. [70]

Tonic immobility as a scientific tool has also been used with mice, [71] gerbils, [72] guinea pigs, [73] rats, [67] rabbits [74] and pigs. [75]

See also

Explanatory notes

  1. ↑ Alternative names include playing dead, feigning death, playing possum, thanatosis, animal hypnosis, immobilization catatonia, or tonic immobility, the latter of which is preferred in the scientific literature on the subject. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethology</span> Scientific objective study of non-human animal behaviour

Ethology is a branch of zoology that studies the behaviour of non-human animals. It has its scientific roots in the work of Charles Darwin and of American and German ornithologists of the late 19th and early 20th century, including Charles O. Whitman, Oskar Heinroth, and Wallace Craig. The modern discipline of ethology is generally considered to have begun during the 1930s with the work of the Dutch biologist Nikolaas Tinbergen and the Austrian biologists Konrad Lorenz and Karl von Frisch, the three winners of the 1973 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Ethology combines laboratory and field science, with a strong relation to neuroanatomy, ecology, and evolutionary biology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fear</span> Basic emotion induced by a perceived threat

Fear is an intensely unpleasant primal emotion in response to perceiving or recognizing a danger or threat. Fear causes psychological changes that may produce behavioral reactions such as mounting an aggressive response or fleeing the threat. Fear in human beings may occur in response to a certain stimulus occurring in the present, or in anticipation or expectation of a future threat perceived as a risk to oneself. The fear response arises from the perception of danger leading to confrontation with or escape from/avoiding the threat, which in extreme cases of fear can be a freeze response.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Predation</span> Biological interaction where a predator kills and eats a prey organism

Predation is a biological interaction where one organism, the predator, kills and eats another organism, its prey. It is one of a family of common feeding behaviours that includes parasitism and micropredation and parasitoidism. It is distinct from scavenging on dead prey, though many predators also scavenge; it overlaps with herbivory, as seed predators and destructive frugivores are predators.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Animal communication</span> Transfer of information from animal to animal

Animal communication is the transfer of information from one or a group of animals to one or more other animals that affects the current or future behavior of the receivers. Information may be sent intentionally, as in a courtship display, or unintentionally, as in the transfer of scent from predator to prey with kairomones. Information may be transferred to an "audience" of several receivers. Animal communication is a rapidly growing area of study in disciplines including animal behavior, sociology, neurology and animal cognition. Many aspects of animal behavior, such as symbolic name use, emotional expression, learning and sexual behavior, are being understood in new ways.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fight-or-flight response</span> Physiological reaction to a perceived threat or harmful event

The fight-or-flight or the fight-flight-freeze-or-fawn is a physiological reaction that occurs in response to a perceived harmful event, attack, or threat to survival. It was first described by Walter Bradford Cannon. His theory states that animals react to threats with a general discharge of the sympathetic nervous system, preparing the animal for fighting or fleeing. More specifically, the adrenal medulla produces a hormonal cascade that results in the secretion of catecholamines, especially norepinephrine and epinephrine. The hormones estrogen, testosterone, and cortisol, as well as the neurotransmitters dopamine and serotonin, also affect how organisms react to stress. The hormone osteocalcin might also play a part.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-predator adaptation</span> Defensive feature of prey for selective advantage

Anti-predator adaptations are mechanisms developed through evolution that assist prey organisms in their constant struggle against predators. Throughout the animal kingdom, adaptations have evolved for every stage of this struggle, namely by avoiding detection, warding off attack, fighting back, or escaping when caught.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Escape response</span>

Escape response, escape reaction, or escape behavior is a mechanism by which animals avoid potential predation. It consists of a rapid sequence of movements, or lack of movement, that position the animal in such a way that allows it to hide, freeze, or flee from the supposed predator. Often, an animal's escape response is representative of an instinctual defensive mechanism, though there is evidence that these escape responses may be learned or influenced by experience.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Poison shyness</span>

Poison shyness, also called conditioned food aversion, is the avoidance of a toxic substance by an animal that has previously ingested that substance. Animals learn an association between stimulus characteristics, usually the taste or odor, of a toxic substance and the illness it produces; this allows them to detect and avoid the substance. Poison shyness occurs as an evolutionary adaptation in many animals, most prominently in generalists that feed on many different materials. It is often called bait shyness when it occurs during attempts at pest control of insects and animals. If the pest ingests the poison bait at sublethal doses, it typically detects and avoids the bait, rendering the bait ineffective.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shark agonistic display</span> Animal behavior

Agonism is a broad term which encompasses many behaviours that result from, or are triggered by biological conflict between competing organisms. Approximately 23 shark species are capable of producing such displays when threatened by intraspecific or interspecific competitors, as an evolutionary strategy to avoid unnecessary combat. The behavioural, postural, social and kinetic elements which comprise this complex, ritualized display can be easily distinguished from normal, or non-display behaviour, considered typical of that species' life history. The display itself confers pertinent information to the foe regarding the displayer's physical fitness, body size, inborn biological weaponry, confidence and determination to fight. This behaviour is advantageous because it is much less biologically taxing for an individual to display its intention to fight than the injuries it would sustain during conflict, which is why agonistic displays have been reinforced through evolutionary time, as an adaptation to personal fitness. Agonistic displays are essential to the social dynamics of many biological taxa, extending far beyond sharks.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Matutinal</span> Natural world activity in early morning

Matutinal, matinal, and matutine are terms used in the life sciences to indicate something of, relating to, or occurring in the early morning. The term may describe crepuscular animals that are significantly active during the predawn or early morning hours. During the morning twilight period and shortly thereafter, these animals partake in important tasks, such as scanning for mates, mating, and foraging.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nesting instinct</span> Instinct in pregnant animals related to estradiol

Nesting behavior refers to an instinct in animals during reproduction to prepare a place with optimal conditions for offspring. The nesting place provides protection against predators and competitors that mean to exploit or kill offspring. It also provides protection against the physical environment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Autohaemorrhaging</span> Action of animals deliberately ejecting blood from their bodies

Autohaemorrhaging, or reflex bleeding, is the action of animals deliberately ejecting blood from their bodies. Autohaemorrhaging has been observed as occurring in two variations. In the first form, blood is squirted toward a predator. The blood of these animals usually contains toxic compounds, making the behaviour an effective chemical defence mechanism. In the second form, blood is not squirted, but is slowly emitted from the animal's body. This form appears to serve a deterrent effect, and is used by animals whose blood does not seem to be toxic. Most animals that autohaemorrhage are insects, but some reptiles also display this behaviour.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pain in fish</span> Overview about the pain in fish

Fish fulfill several criteria proposed as indicating that non-human animals experience pain. These fulfilled criteria include a suitable nervous system and sensory receptors, opioid receptors and reduced responses to noxious stimuli when given analgesics and local anaesthetics, physiological changes to noxious stimuli, displaying protective motor reactions, exhibiting avoidance learning and making trade-offs between noxious stimulus avoidance and other motivational requirements.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pain in animals</span> Overview about pain in animals

Pain negatively affects the health and welfare of animals. "Pain" is defined by the International Association for the Study of Pain as "an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage, or described in terms of such damage." Only the animal experiencing the pain can know the pain's quality and intensity, and the degree of suffering. It is harder, if even possible, for an observer to know whether an emotional experience has occurred, especially if the sufferer cannot communicate. Therefore, this concept is often excluded in definitions of pain in animals, such as that provided by Zimmerman: "an aversive sensory experience caused by actual or potential injury that elicits protective motor and vegetative reactions, results in learned avoidance and may modify species-specific behaviour, including social behaviour." Nonhuman animals cannot report their feelings to language-using humans in the same manner as human communication, but observation of their behaviour provides a reasonable indication as to the extent of their pain. Just as with doctors and medics who sometimes share no common language with their patients, the indicators of pain can still be understood.

Freezing behavior, also called the freeze response or being petrified, is a reaction to specific stimuli, most commonly observed in prey animals. When a prey animal has been caught and completely overcome by the predator, it may respond by "freezing up/petrification" or in other words by uncontrollably becoming rigid or limp. Studies typically assess a conditioned freezing behavior response to stimuli that typically or innately do not cause fear, such as a tone or shock. Freezing behavior is most easily characterized by changes in blood pressure and lengths of time in crouching position, but it also is known to cause changes such as shortness of breath, increased heart rate, sweating, or choking sensation. However, since it is difficult to measure these sympathetic responses to fear stimuli, studies are typically confined to simple crouching times. A response to stimuli typically is said to be a "fight or flight", but is more completely described as "fight, flight, or freeze". In addition, freezing is observed to occur before or after a fight or flight response.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Caudal luring</span> Form of aggressive mimicry where the predator attracts prey using its tail

Caudal luring is a form of aggressive mimicry characterized by the waving or wriggling of the predator's tail to attract prey. This movement attracts small animals who mistake the tail for a small worm or other small animal. When the animal approaches to prey on the worm-like tail, the predator will strike. This behavior has been recorded in snakes, sharks, and eels.

Animals have many different tactics for defending themselves, depending on the severity of the threat they are encountering. Stages of threat vary along a spectrum referred to as the "predatory imminence continuum", spanning from low-risk (pre-encounter) to high-risk (interaction) threats. The main assumption of the predatory imminence continuum is that as threat levels increase, defensive response strategies change. During the pre-encounter period, an animal may engage in activities like exploration or foraging. But if the animal senses that a predator is nearby, the animal may begin to express species specific defense reactions such as freezing in an attempt to avoid detection by the predator. However, in situations where a threat is imminent, once the animal is detected by its predator, freezing may no longer be the optimal behaviour for survival. At this point, the animal enters the circa-strike phase, where its behaviour will transition from passive freezing to active flight, or even attack if escape is not possible.

Deception in animals is the transmission of misinformation by one animal to another, of the same or different species, in a way that propagates beliefs that are not true.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Phagomimicry</span>

Phagomimicry is a defensive behaviour of sea hares, in which the animal ejects a mixture of chemicals, which mimic food, and overwhelm the senses of their predator, giving the sea hare a chance to escape. The typical defence response of the sea hare to a predator is to release two chemicals - ink from the ink gland and opaline from the opaline gland. While ink creates a dark, diffuse cloud in the water which disrupts the sensory perception of the predator by acting as a smokescreen and as a decoy, the opaline, which affects the senses dealing with feeding, causes the predator to instinctively attack the cloud of chemicals as if it were indeed food. This ink is able to mimic food by having a high concentration of amino acids and other compounds that are normally found in food, and the attack behaviour of the predator allows the sea-hares the opportunity to escape.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecology of fear</span> Psychological impact induced by predators

The ecology of fear is a conceptual framework describing the psychological impact that predator-induced stress experienced by animals has on populations and ecosystems. Within ecology, the impact of predators has been traditionally viewed as limited to the animals that they directly kill, while the ecology of fear advances evidence that predators may have a far more substantial impact on the individuals that they predate, reducing fecundity, survival and population sizes. To avoid being killed, animals that are preyed upon will employ anti-predator defenses which aid survival but may carry substantial costs.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Humphreys, Rosalind K.; Ruxton, Graeme D. (2018-01-15). "A review of thanatosis (death feigning) as an anti-predator behaviour". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 72 (2): 22. doi:10.1007/s00265-017-2436-8. ISSN   1432-0762. PMC   5769822 . PMID   29386702.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Sakai, Masaki, ed. (2021). Death-Feigning in Insects: Mechanism and Function of Tonic Immobility. Entomology Monographs. Singapore: Springer Singapore. doi:10.1007/978-981-33-6598-8. ISBN   978-981-336-597-1. S2CID   232415330.
  3. ↑ Rogers, Stephen M.; Simpson, Stephen J. (2014). "Thanatosis". Current Biology. 24 (21): R1031–R1033. Bibcode:2014CBio...24R1031R. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2014.08.051 . PMID   25517363. S2CID   235311966.
  4. 1 2 Rusinova, E. V.; Davydov, V. I. (2010-05-21). "Dynamics of Changes in Electrical Activity in the Rabbit Cerebral Cortex during Sequential Sessions of "Animal Hypnosis"". Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology. 40 (5): 471–478. doi:10.1007/s11055-010-9283-7. ISSN   0097-0549. PMID   20490695. S2CID   20118773.
  5. ↑ Miyatake, T.; Katayama, K.; Takeda, Y.; Nakashima, A.; Sugita, A.; Mizumoto, M. (2004-11-07). "Is death–feigning adaptive? Heritable variation in fitness difference of death–feigning behaviour". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. 271 (1554): 2293–2296. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2858. ISSN   0962-8452. PMC   1691851 . PMID   15539355.
  6. ↑ Gilman, T.T.; Marcuse, F.L.; Moore, A.U. (1960). "Animal hypnosis: a study of the induction of tonic immobility in chickens". Journal of Comparative Physiology and Psychology. 43 (2): 99–111. doi:10.1037/h0053659. PMID   15415476.
  7. 1 2 Henningsen, A.D. (1994). "Tonic immobility in 12 elasmobranchs - use as an aid in captive husbandry". Zoo Biology. 13 (4): 325–332. doi:10.1002/zoo.1430130406.
  8. ↑ Jones, R.B (1986). "The tonic immobility reaction of the domestic fowl: a review". World's Poultry Science Journal. 42 (1): 82–96. doi:10.1079/WPS19860008.
  9. ↑ Roelofs, Karin (2017-02-27). "Freeze for action: neurobiological mechanisms in animal and human freezing". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 372 (1718): 20160206. doi:10.1098/rstb.2016.0206. ISSN   0962-8436. PMC   5332864 . PMID   28242739.
  10. ↑ Pasteur, G (1982). "A classificatory review of mimicry systems". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 13: 169–199. doi:10.1146/annurev.es.13.110182.001125.
  11. ↑ Miyatake, T; Katayama, K.; Takeda, Y.; Nakashima, A.; Mizumoto, M.; Mizumoto, M (2004). "Is death-feigning adaptive? Heritable variation in fitness difference of death-feigning behaviour". Proceedings of the Royal Society B . 271 (1554): 2293–2296. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.2858. PMC   1691851 . PMID   15539355.
  12. ↑ Triumph of Life (2006). Alexandria, VA: PBS Home Video.
  13. 1 2 The Chambers Dictionary. Allied Publishers. 1998. p. 1279. ISBN   978-81-86062-25-8.
  14. ↑ Francq, E. (1969). "Behavioural aspects of feigned death in the opossum Didelphis marsupialis". American Midland Naturalist. 81 (2): 556–568. doi:10.2307/2423988. JSTOR   2423988.
  15. ↑ Ann Bailey Dunn. "Playing Possum". Wonderful West Virginia. Archived from the original on October 1, 2011. Retrieved May 11, 2011.
  16. ↑ "Virginia Opossum". Mass Audubon. Archived from the original on December 29, 2010. Retrieved May 11, 2011. Opossums are frequently encountered as corpses along highways. Some biologists believe that many die as they feed on road-killed animals – a favorite food. Others believe that the opossums' small brain (5 times smaller than that of a raccoon) suggests that they may just be too dumb to get out of the way of vehicles!
  17. ↑ "How to survive a bear attack".
  18. ↑ King, B.; H. Leaich (2006). "Variation in propensity to exhibit thanatosis in Nasonia vitripennis (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae)". Journal of Insect Behavior. 19 (2): 241–249. Bibcode:2006JIBeh..19..241K. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.581.3100 . doi:10.1007/s10905-006-9022-7. S2CID   26623855.
  19. ↑ Nishino, H. (2004). "Motor output characterizing thanatosis in the cricket Gryllus bimaculatus". Journal of Experimental Biology. 207 (22): 3899–3915. doi: 10.1242/jeb.01220 . PMID   15472021.
  20. 1 2 3 4 Line Spinner Hansen; Sofia Fernandez Gonzales; Søren Toft; Trine Bilde (2008). "Thanatosis as an adaptive male mating strategy in the nuptial gift–giving spider Pisaura mirabilis". Behavioral Ecology. 19 (3): 546–551. doi: 10.1093/beheco/arm165 .
  21. ↑ Gene S. Helfman; Bruce B. Collette; Douglas E. Facey (1997). The diversity of fishes. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 324. ISBN   978-0-86542-256-8.
  22. ↑ McKaye, K.R. (1981). "Field observation on death feigning: a unique hunting behavior by the predatory cichlid, Haplochromis livingstonii, of Lake Malawi". Environmental Biology of Fishes. 6 (3–4): 361–365. Bibcode:1981EnvBF...6..361M. doi:10.1007/bf00005766. S2CID   24244576.
  23. ↑ Lucanus, O (1998). "Darwin's pond: Malawi and Tanganyika". Tropical Fish Hobbyist. 47: 150–154.
  24. ↑ Tobler, M (2005). "Feigning death in the Central American cichlid Parachromis friedrichsthalii". Journal of Fish Biology. 66 (3): 877–881. Bibcode:2005JFBio..66..877T. doi:10.1111/j.0022-1112.2005.00648.x.
  25. 1 2 3 4 Amemiya, Mio; Sasakawa, Kôji (2021-01-10). "Factors Affecting Thanatosis in the Braconid Parasitoid Wasp Heterospilus prosopidis". Insects. 12 (1): 48. doi: 10.3390/insects12010048 . ISSN   2075-4450. PMC   7826778 . PMID   33435169.
  26. ↑ Martinez, Alexander; Ritzi, Christopher M. (2020-03-31). "Duration of Thanatosis is Based on Temperature in Estigmene acrea1". Southwestern Entomologist. 45 (1): 289. doi:10.3958/059.045.0130. ISSN   0147-1724. S2CID   214718486.
  27. 1 2 3 4 Cassill, Deby L.; Vo, Kim; Becker, Brandie (2008-04-05). "Young fire ant workers feign death and survive aggressive neighbors". Naturwissenschaften. 95 (7): 617–624. Bibcode:2008NW.....95..617C. doi:10.1007/s00114-008-0362-3. ISSN   0028-1042. PMID   18392601. S2CID   2942824.
  28. 1 2 3 4 King, B. H.; Leaich, H. R. (2006). "Variation in Propensity to Exhibit Thanatosis in Nasonia vitripennis (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae)". Journal of Insect Behavior. 19 (2): 241–249. Bibcode:2006JIBeh..19..241K. doi:10.1007/s10905-006-9022-7. ISSN   0892-7553. S2CID   26623855.
  29. 1 2 Taylor, Katherine L.; Henry, Charles S.; Farkas, Timothy E. (21 July 2023). "Why fake death? Environmental and genetic control of tonic immobility in larval lacewings (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae)". Journal of Insect Science. doi:10.1093/jisesa/iead066. PMC   10407979 . PMID   37551937 . Retrieved 2024-04-29.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  30. ↑ Whitman, P.A.; Marshall, J.A.; Keller, E.C.Jr (1986). "Tonic immobility in the smooth dogfish shark, Mustelus canis (Pisces, Carcharhinidae)". Copeia. 1986 (3): 829–832. doi:10.2307/1444973. JSTOR   1444973.
  31. ↑ Watsky, M.A.; Gruber, S.H. (1990). "Induction and duration of tonic immobility in the lemon shark, Negaprion brevirostris". Fish Physiology and Biochemistry. 8 (3): 207–210. Bibcode:1990FPBio...8..207W. doi:10.1007/bf00004459. PMID   24221983. S2CID   6763380.
  32. ↑ Davie, P.S.; Franklin, C.E.; Grigg, G.C. (1993). "Blood pressure and heart rate during tonic immobility in the black tipped reef shark, Carcharhinus melanoptera". Fish Physiology and Biochemistry. 12 (2): 95–100. Bibcode:1993FPBio..12...95D. doi:10.1007/bf00004374. PMID   24202688. S2CID   19258658.
  33. ↑ "Tonic immobility". Shark defense: Chemical repellents. Archived from the original on June 14, 2006. Retrieved January 28, 2006.
  34. ↑ Heithaus, M.R.; Dill, L.M.; Marshall, G.J.; Buhleier, B. (2002). "Habitat use and foraging behavior of tiger sharks (Galeocerdo cuvier) in a seagrass ecosystem". Marine Biology. 140 (2): 237–248. Bibcode:2002MarBi.140..237M. doi:10.1007/s00227-001-0711-7. S2CID   83545503.
  35. ↑ Holland, K.N.; Wetherbee, B.M.; Lowe, C.G.; Meyer, C.G. (1999). "Movements of tiger sharks (Galeocerdo cuvier) in coastal Hawaiian waters". Marine Biology. 134 (4): 665–673. Bibcode:1999MarBi.134..665H. doi:10.1007/s002270050582. S2CID   7687775.
  36. ↑ Brooks, E. J., et al. "The Stress Physiology of Extended Duration Tonic Immobility in the Juvenile Lemon Shark, Negaprion Brevirostris (Poey 1868)." Journal of experimental marine biology and ecology 409.1-2 (2011): 351-60.
  37. ↑ Lauren Smith (2017-11-16). "Orcas vs great white sharks: in a battle of the apex predators who wins?". The Guardian. Retrieved 2017-11-18.
  38. ↑ Table; Whitman, P.A.; Marshall, J.A.; Keller, E.C.Jr (1986). "Tonic immobility in the smooth dogfish shark, Mustelus canis (Pisces, Carcharhinidae)". Copeia. 1986 (3): 829–832. doi:10.2307/1444973. JSTOR   1444973.
  39. ↑ Crawford, F.T. (1977). "Induction and duration of tonic immobility". The Psychological Record. 27: 89–107. doi:10.1007/bf03394435. S2CID   149316109.
  40. ↑ Howe, J.C. (1991). "Field observations of death feigning in the convict tang, Acanthurus triostegus (Linnaeus), with comments on the nocturnal color pattern in juvenile specimens". Journal of Aquariculture and Aquatic Sciences. 6: 13–15.
  41. 1 2 3 Toledo, Luís Felipe; Sazima, Ivan; Haddad, Célio F.B. (2010-07-12). "Is it all death feigning? Case in anurans". Journal of Natural History. 44 (31–32): 1979–1988. Bibcode:2010JNatH..44.1979T. doi:10.1080/00222931003624804. ISSN   0022-2933. S2CID   84462802.
  42. 1 2 Gregory, Patrick T.; Isaac, Leigh Anne; Griffiths, Richard A (2007). "Death feigning by grass snakes (Natrix natrix) in response to handling by human "predators."". Journal of Comparative Psychology. 121 (2): 123–129. doi:10.1037/0735-7036.121.2.123. ISSN   1939-2087. PMID   17516791.
  43. ↑ Santos, Maurício Beux dos; Oliveira, Mauro Cesar Lamim Martins de; Verrastro, Laura; Tozetti, Alexandro Marques (2010). "Playing dead to stay alive: death-feigning in Liolaemus occipitalis (Squamata: Liolaemidae)". Biota Neotropica. 10 (4): 361–364. doi: 10.1590/s1676-06032010000400043 . hdl: 10183/29497 . ISSN   1676-0603.
  44. ↑ Prestrude, A.M.; Crawford, F.T. (1970). "Tonic immobility in the lizard, iguana iguana". Animal Behaviour. 18 (2): 391–395. doi:10.1016/s0003-3472(70)80052-5.
  45. ↑ Hennig, C.W; Dunlap, W.P. (1978). "Tonic immobility in Anolis carolinensis: Effects of time and conditions of captivity". Behavioral Biology. 23 (1): 75–86. doi:10.1016/s0091-6773(78)91180-x.
  46. 1 2 Gallup, Gordon G.; Nash, Richard F.; Wagner, Alan M. (1971). "The tonic immobility reaction in chickens: Response characteristics and methodology". Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation. 3 (5): 237–239. doi: 10.3758/bf03208389 . ISSN   0005-7878. S2CID   143472517.
  47. 1 2 Gallup, Gordon G. (1974). "Genetic influence on tonic immobility in chickens". Animal Learning & Behavior. 2 (2): 145–147. doi: 10.3758/bf03199142 . ISSN   0090-4996. S2CID   144313260.
  48. ↑ Gilman, Thelma T.; Marcuse, F. L.; Moore, A. U. (1950). "Animal hypnosis: a study in the induction of tonic immobility in chickens". Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology. 43 (2): 99–111. doi:10.1037/h0053659. ISSN   0021-9940. PMID   15415476.
  49. ↑ CRAIG, J.V.; KUJIYAT, S.K.; DAYTON, A.D. (1984). "Tonic Immobility Responses of White Leghorn Hens Affected by Induction Techniques and Genetic Stock Differences". Poultry Science. 63 (1): 1–10. doi: 10.3382/ps.0630001 . ISSN   0032-5791. PMID   6701136.
  50. ↑ Fogelholm, Jesper; Inkabi, Samuel; Höglund, Andrey; Abbey-Lee, Robin; Johnsson, Martin; Jensen, Per; Henriksen, Rie; Wright, Dominic (2019-05-07). "Genetical Genomics of Tonic Immobility in the Chicken". Genes. 10 (5): 341. doi: 10.3390/genes10050341 . ISSN   2073-4425. PMC   6562468 . PMID   31067744.
  51. 1 2 Sargeant, Alan B.; Eberhardt, Lester E. (1975). "Death Feigning by Ducks in Response to Predation by Red Foxes (Vulpes fulva)". American Midland Naturalist. 94 (1): 108. doi:10.2307/2424542. ISSN   0003-0031. JSTOR   2424542.
  52. ↑ Whishaw, Ian Q.; Previsich, Nick; Flannigan, Kelly P. (1978). "Tonic immobility in feral and domestic dutch rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), mountain cottontail (Sylvilagus nuttalli), and whitetail jackrabbit (Lepus townsendi) as a function of posture". Behavioral Biology. 24 (1): 88–96. doi:10.1016/s0091-6773(78)92941-3. ISSN   0091-6773.
  53. 1 2 Giannico, Amália Turner; Lima, Leandro; Lange, Rogério Ribas; Froes, Tilde Rodrigues; Montiani-Ferreira, Fabiano (2014-02-11). "Proven cardiac changes during death-feigning (tonic immobility) in rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus)". Journal of Comparative Physiology A. 200 (4): 305–310. doi:10.1007/s00359-014-0884-4. ISSN   0340-7594. PMID   24515628. S2CID   12719656.
  54. 1 2 3 4 Ewell, Albert H.; Cullen, John M.; Woodruff, Michael L. (1981). "Tonic immobility as a predator-defense in the rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus)". Behavioral and Neural Biology. 31 (4): 483–489. doi:10.1016/s0163-1047(81)91585-5. ISSN   0163-1047.
  55. ↑ "Archived copy" (PDF). www.aic.gov.au. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 September 2013. Retrieved 17 January 2022.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  56. ↑ Hopper, James W. "Why many rape victims don't fight or yell" – via www.washingtonpost.com.
  57. ↑ Kalaf, Juliana; Coutinho, Evandro Silva Freire; Vilete, Liliane Maria Pereira; Luz, Mariana Pires; Berger, William; Mendlowicz, Mauro; Volchan, Eliane; Andreoli, Sergio Baxter; Quintana, Maria Inês; De Jesus Mari, Jair; Figueira, Ivan (March 7, 2017). "Sexual trauma is more strongly associated with tonic immobility than other types of trauma – A population based study". Journal of Affective Disorders. 215: 71–76. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2017.03.009. PMID   28319694.
  58. ↑ Porges S W (2003). "Social engagement and attachment: a phylogenetic perspective". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1008 (1): 31–47. Bibcode:2003NYASA1008...31P. doi:10.1196/annals.1301.004. PMID   14998870. S2CID   1377353.
  59. ↑ Hoskovec, J; Svorad, D (1969). "The relationship between human and animal hypnosis". American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis. 11 (3): 180–182. doi:10.1080/00029157.1969.10402029. PMID   5764620.
  60. ↑ Cortez, C. M.; Silva, D (2013). "Hypnosis, tonic immobility and electroencephalogram". Jornal Brasileiro de Psiquiatria. 62 (4): 285–296. doi: 10.1590/S0047-20852013000400006 . ISSN   0047-2085.
  61. ↑ Tsoukalas I (2012). "The origin of REM sleep: A hypothesis". Dreaming. 22 (4): 253–283. doi:10.1037/a0030790.
  62. ↑ Tsoukalas, Ioannis (2018). "Theory of Mind: Towards an Evolutionary Theory". Evolutionary Psychological Science. 4 (1): 38–66. doi: 10.1007/s40806-017-0112-x . Pdf.
  63. ↑ Gallup, G.G. Jr.; Nash, R.F.; Potter, R.J.; Donegan, N.H. (1970). "Effect of varying conditions of fear on immobility reactions in domestic chickens (Gallus gullus)". Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology. 73 (3): 442–445. doi:10.1037/h0030227. PMID   5514679.
  64. ↑ Gallup, G.G. Jr (1979). "Tonic immobility as a measure of fear in the domestic fowl". Animal Behaviour. 27: 316–317. doi:10.1016/0003-3472(79)90159-3. S2CID   53271327.
  65. 1 2 Jones, B.; Faure, J.M. (1981). "Tonic immobility ("righting time") in laying hens housed in cages and pens". Applied Animal Ethology. 7 (4): 369–372. doi:10.1016/0304-3762(81)90063-8.
  66. ↑ Forkman, B.; Boissy, A.; Meunier-Salaün, M.-C. Canali; Jones, R.B. (2007). "A critical review of fear tests used on cattle, pigs, sheep, poultry and horses". Physiology & Behavior. 92 (3): 340–374. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.03.016. PMID   18046784. S2CID   15179564.
  67. 1 2 Zamudio, S.R.; Quevedo-Corona, L.; Garcés, L.; De La Cruz, F. (2009). "The effects of acute stress and acute corticosterone administration on the immobility response in rats". Brain Research Bulletin. 80 (6): 331–336. doi:10.1016/j.brainresbull.2009.09.005. PMID   19772903. S2CID   24347387.
  68. ↑ Jones, R.B. (1987). "Fearfulness of caged laying hens: The effects of cage level and type of roofing". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 17 (1–2): 171–175. doi:10.1016/0168-1591(87)90018-9.
  69. ↑ Scott, G.B.; Moran, P. (1993). "Fear levels in laying hens carried by hand and by mechanical conveyors". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 36 (4): 337–345. doi:10.1016/0168-1591(93)90131-8.
  70. ↑ Cashman, P.; Nicol, C.J.; Jones, R.B. (1989). "Effects of transportation on the tonic immobility fear reactions of broilers". British Poultry Science. 30 (2): 211–221. doi:10.1080/00071668908417141.
  71. ↑ Bazovkina, D.V.; Tibeikina, M.A.; Kulikov, A.V.; Popova, N.K. (2011). "Effects of lipopolysaccharide and interleukin-6 on cataleptic immobility and locomotor activity in mice". Neuroscience Letters. 487 (3): 302–304. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2010.10.043. PMID   20974218. S2CID   6789654.
  72. ↑ Griebel, G.; Stemmelin, J.; Scatton, B. (2005). "Effects of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor antagonist rimonabant in models of emotional reactivity in rodents". Biological Psychiatry. 57 (3): 261–267. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.10.032. PMID   15691527. S2CID   18429945.
  73. ↑ Donatti, A.F.; Leite-Panissi, C.R.A. (2011). "Activation of corticotropin-releasing factor receptors from the basolateral or central amygdala increases the tonic immobility response in guinea pigs: An innate fear behaviour". Behavioural Brain Research. 225 (1): 23–30. doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2011.06.027. PMID   21741994. S2CID   1566034.
  74. ↑ Verwer, C.M.; van Amerongen, G.; van den Bos, R.; Coenraad, F.M.H. (2009). "Handling effects on body weight and behaviour of group-housed male rabbits in a laboratory setting". Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 117 (1–2): 93–102. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2008.12.004.
  75. ↑ Hessing, M.J.C.; Hagelsø, A.M.; Schouten, W.G.P.; Wiepkema, P.R.; van Beek, J.A.M. (1994). "Individual behavioral and physiological strategies in pigs". Physiology and Behavior. 55 (1): 39–46. doi:10.1016/0031-9384(94)90007-8. PMID   8140172. S2CID   24787960.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.