How Do Fish Use the Movement of Other Fish to Make Decisions?

From Individual Movement to Collective Decision Making

  • Conference paper
Proceedings of the European Conference on Complex Systems 2012

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Complexity ((SPCOM))

  • 795 Accesses

Abstract

Recent experiments by Ward et al. have shown that fish a moving fish group detects hidden predators faster and more accurately than isolated individuals. The increase in speed, in particular, seems to be a consequence of the movement-mediated nature of the interactions used by fish to share information. The present work aims at investigating the link between movement and information transfer underlying collective decisions in fish. We define an individual-based self-propelled particle (SPP) model of the decision-making process analyzed by Ward et al. We fit it to data in order to deduce the smallest set of interaction rules consistent with the experimentally observed behaviour. We infer the relative weight of different social forces on fish movement during the decision-making process. We find that, in order to reproduce the observed experimental trends, both the social forces of alignment and attraction have to be introduced in the model, alignment playing a more important role than attraction. We finally apply this model to make theoretical predictions about fish ability to detect and avoid a moving predator in a natural environment such as open water.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    This is chosen according to the fact that the predator replica used in [6] was 12 cm long.

References

  1. Dall SRX, Giraldeau LA, Olsson O, McNamara JM, Stephens DW (2005) Information and its use by animals in evolutionary ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 20(4):187–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. King AJ, Cowlishaw G (2007) When to use social information: the advantage of large group size in individual decision making. Biol Lett 3(2):137–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Couzin ID (2009) Collective cognition in animal groups. Trends Cogn Sci 13(1):36–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Treherne J, Foster W (1980) The effects of group size on predator avoidance in a marine insect. Anim Behav 28(4):1119–1122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lima SL (1995) Back to the basics of anti-predatory vigilance: the group-size effect. Anim Behav 49(1):11–20

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Ward AJW, Herbert-Read JE, Sumpter DJT, Krause J (2011) Fast and accurate decisions through collective vigilance in fish shoals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(6):2312–2315

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sumpter D, Buhl J, Biro D, Couzin I (2008) Information transfer in moving animal groups. Theory Biosci 127(2):177–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sumpter DJT, Krause J, James R, Couzin ID, Ward AJW (2008) Consensus decision making by fish. Curr Biol 18(22):1773–1777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ward AJW, Sumpter DJT, Couzin ID, Hart PJB, Krause J (2008) Quorum decision-making facilitates information transfer in fish shoals. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(19):6948–6953

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  10. Vicsek T, András Czirók EBJ, Cohen I (1995) Novel type of phase transition in a system of self-driven particles. Phys Rev Lett 75:1226

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  11. Czirók A, Vicsek T (2000) Collective behavior of interacting self-propelled particles. Physica A 281:17–29

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Czirok A, Barabasi A, Vicsek T (1999) Collective motion of self-propelled particles: kinetic phase transition in one dimension. Phys Rev Lett 82(1):209–212

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Couzin ID, Krause J, James R, Ruxton GD, Franks NR (2002) Collective memory and spatial sorting in animal groups. J Theor Biol 218(1):1–11

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Vicsek T, Zafeiris A (2012) Collective motion. Phys Rep. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.03.004

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mann RP (2011) Bayesian inference for identifying interaction rules in moving animal groups. PLoS ONE 6(8):e22827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Strombom D (2011) Collective motion from local attraction. J Theor Biol 283(1):145–151

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Rountree RA, Sedberry GR (2009) A theoretical model of shoaling behavior based on a consideration of patterns of overlap among the visual fields of individual members. Acta Ethol 12(2):61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Herbert-Read JE, Perna A, Mann RP, Schaerf TM, Sumpter DJT, Ward AJW (2011) Inferring the rules of interaction of shoaling fish. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108(46):18726–18731

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. Radakov D (1973) Schooling in the ecology of fish. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. Romey WL (1996) Individual differences make a difference in the trajectories of simulated schools of fish. Ecol Model 92(1):65–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lemasson B, Anderson J, Goodwin R (2009) Collective motion in animal groups from a neurobiological perspective: the adaptive benefits of dynamic sensory loads and selective attention. J Theor Biol 261(4):501–510

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Moussaïd M, Guillot EG, Moreau M, Fehrenbach J, Chabiron O, Lemercier S, Pettré J, Appert-Rolland C, Degond P, Theraulaz G (2012) Traffic instabilities in self-organized pedestrian crowds. PLoS Comput Biol 8(3):e1002442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hemelrijk CK, Hildenbrandt H, Reinders J, Stamhuis EJ (2010) Emergence of oblong school shape: models and empirical data of fish. Ethology 116(11):1099–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bottinelli, A., Perna, A., Ward, A., Sumpter, D. (2013). How Do Fish Use the Movement of Other Fish to Make Decisions?. In: Gilbert, T., Kirkilionis, M., Nicolis, G. (eds) Proceedings of the European Conference on Complex Systems 2012. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00395-5_73

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Navigation