Spatial and temporal patterns of water flow generated by suction-feeding bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus resolved by Particle Image Velocimetry
1 Section of Evolution and Ecology, University of California, One Shields
Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA
2 Department of Mathematics, University of California, One Shields Avenue,
Davis, CA 95616, USA
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: sday{at}alumni.virginia.edu)
Accepted 24 May 2005
![]() |
Summary |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: DPIV, suction feeding, Centrarchidae, sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
During a suction-feeding event, the predator generates a flow of water by
rapidly opening the mouth and expanding the buccal cavity. Prior work has
modeled this flow using potential flow theory
(Drost et al., 1988;
Muller et al., 1982
;
Weihs, 1980
) and investigated
the effects of ram/suction interactions using these inviscid irrotational
models (van Leeuwen and Muller,
1984b
; Weihs,
1980
). Empirical measurements of this flow are rare, however, with
only a single recent quantitative study
(Ferry-Graham et al., 2003
)
providing measurements at select locations in a two-dimensional space in front
of a feeding bluegill sunfish. All additional empirical studies are either
largely qualitative (Muller and Osse,
1984
; van Leeuwen and Muller,
1984a
) or include quantitative measurements of particle streaking
at select locations in front of the fish
(Lauder and Clark, 1984
). To
date, no empirical study has resolved the flow field in front of the fish with
sufficient spatial and temporal resolution to quantify the distribution of
fluid speed as a function of distance in front of the fish. In this study we
characterize the flow in front of suction-feeding bluegill sunfish Lepomis
macrochirus by taking measurements with high spatial and temporal
resolution using Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) and a novel method of
tracking individual seed particles for the duration of each feeding, to
determine the parcel of water that the fish ingested.
The predator can manipulate the generated flow by modulating how wide the mouth is opened and also by varying the speed that it opens the mouth. This is the first empirical study to determine the effect of these kinematic variations on the flow field in front of the head, or to compare the relative timing of fluid speed to kinematic events. In this study we provide a quantitative functional description of the fluid velocity generated by suction-feeding bluegill sunfish and relate this flow pattern to the rate of mouth opening and the size of the mouth aperture.
By relating the timing of mouth opening to the temporal development of the
flow field we are able to test one of the predictions from computational
modeling studies of suction feeding. The expanding cone model of suction
feeding was developed in the early 1980s and has provided the most complete
insight to date of the coupling of internal expansion of the fish's head with
the flow field generated by this expansion
(Muller et al., 1982;
van Leeuwen and Muller, 1983
).
A key result from this body of work was that peak flow speeds at the mouth
aperture would be reached at a time relatively early in the gape opening
sequence, at about 3050% of maximum mouth diameter. We test this
prediction.
Finally, we measured the volume of the ingested parcel of water to
determine the shape of the water ingested by the fish and whether water
exiting the opercular cavities posteriorly during the feeding sequence
significantly contributes to the total water flow. To our knowledge there are
no previous empirical measurements of the shape or volume of ingested fluid,
although modelers have generated predictions of both variables in other fish
species (de Jong et al., 1987;
Drost et al., 1988
;
Muller and van Leeuwen,
1985
).
![]() |
Materials and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Experimental set-up
Digital Particle Image Velocimetry (DPIV) is a technique that measures the
instantaneous velocity field within an illuminated plane of the fluid field
using light scattered from particles seeded into the fluid
(Adrian, 1991). Experiments
were conducted in a 200 liter experimental aquarium that was integrated with a
particle image velocimetry system (Fig.
1). An Innova I-90 continuous argon-ion laser rated at 5 W output
power (Coherent, Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA) and a set of cylindrical and
spherical lenses created a collimated light sheet of approximately 1 mm
thickness and 510 cm width, located within the aquarium. The laser
sheet entered the bottom of the aquarium via a mirror and was
directed upwards in the same orientation as the sagittal plane of the
approaching fish. After traversing the tank a mirror near the surface of the
tank reflected the sheet back down within the same plane as the upward
directed beam, but angled towards the posterior of the fish. This
downward-directed sheet illuminated the fluid field above and posterior to the
upper lip of the fish, which would have been in the shadow of the
upward-directed beam and also effectively doubled the amount of scattered
light where both beams were present. The aquarium was seeded with 14 µm
silver-coated glass beads (Potter Industries, Inc. Carlstadt, NJ, USA) with a
specific gravity of 1.05. A NAC Memrecam ci digital high-speed video camera
(Tokyo, Japan) was used to acquire a lateral image of the fish and light
scattered from particles. The camera has a 512 x462 pixel CMOS sensor,
and we used a frame rate of 500 Hz and a shutter speed of 1/3000 in order to
reduce particle streaking at high fluid speeds.
|
Experimental protocol
Prey were positioned within the laser sheet and within the camera field of
view. Although the bluegill swam freely during feedings, its mid-sagittal
plane lay in the same plane as the laser sheet at the time of prey capture. An
anterior view of the feedings was recorded at 30 Hz with a digital camcorder
(Sony Inc., Tokyo, Japan) and used to determine the position of the fish
within the laser sheet. Only measurements where the predator was centered on
the laser sheet were analyzed. The high-speed video camera remained fixed in
position and focused on the plane of the laser.
Prior to each feeding, the fish was confined to one end of the aquarium by a barrier and trap door. After opening the door, the fish was free to pass through a 5 x15 cm opening in the barrier, which controlled the fish's starting position, to swim towards the prey (Fig. 1). Fish were fed both non-evasive (tubifex worms) and evasive (ghost shrimp) prey to elicit a range of effort. Worms were introduced through Tygon® tubing attached to a syringe and allowed to fall freely through the camera field of view. Live ghost shrimp were held in position by a thin (0.2 mm diameter) steel wire or surgical thread introduced under the exoskeleton. While controlling the initial position of the shrimp, tethering did not normally prevent the escape response of the prey. Every third shrimp introduced to the fish was not constrained in any way. While the unrestrained prey did not normally remain in the camera field of view or lead to successful measurements, they helped to sustain the effort of the bluegill. The total number of feedings for individuals 1, 2 and 3 were 16, 17 and 9, respectively. 23 of these were worm feedings and 19 were shrimp.
Feeding sequences where the prey remained within the laser sheet and camera field of view prior to the strike were kept for analysis. Images were transferred from NAC proprietary format into a series of TIFF images. The entire sequence from the beginning of mouth opening until mouth closure lasted for 20150 images (40300 ms), depending on the speed of the strike.
Data analysis
The positions of the anterior margin of the eye, anterior tip of the upper
jaw and anterior tip of the lower jaw were measured for each image of the
video sequence by manually tracking using Image J (NIH, Washington, DC, USA).
These coordinates were copied into an Excel spreadsheet and used to calculate
several kinematic variables. The position of the center of the mouth was
defined as the midpoint between the upper and lower jaw tips. Gape was the
distance from tip of the upper jaw to tip of the lower jaw and peak gape
(PG) was the maximum value of gape during the strike. Time to peak
gape (TTPG) was the duration from 20% of PG to 95% of
PG, as in Sanford and Wainwright
(2002). This was done to
eliminate the highly variable stage that occurs during the beginning of mouth
opening and because the exact time when peak gape is reached is difficult to
determine accurately due to its asymptotic approach. Ram speed was calculated
as the horizontal component of the temporal derivative of eye position. Jaw
protrusion was the increase in distance from the center of the mouth to the
eye referenced to the initial distance between these, and jaw protrusion speed
was calculated as the time rate of change of this distance. The measurements
of jaw protrusion and horizontal position were smoothed with a 3-point moving
average before calculating derivative quantities. Derivatives were calculated
as a two-point derivative approximation, which is justified in light of the
fact that only the relative timing and not the magnitude of derivative
quantities is relevant to the results.
An adaptive mesh cross-correlation algorithm created by Scarano and
Riethmuller (1999) was used to
calculate fluid velocities from image pairs, each pair consisting of two
successive images from the high-speed video sequence. All of the measurements
for this work used an initial interrogation window size of 64 x64 pixels
and two refinement steps. The final image interrogation used 16 x16
pixel interrogation regions with 50% overlap, so that the measurement grid
spacing was 8 pixels, corresponding to approximately 0.7 mm for the camera
field of view (3.7 x5 cm). Each image pair lead to a simultaneous
measurement of two components of velocity at every location on a regularly
spaced i,j ordered measurement grid with overall dimensions of i=53 and j=70.
In addition to two components of velocity, the algorithm returned the
signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for each correlation in the final interrogation
and this was used for validation of the measurements.
All measured and presented fluid speeds are in the earth-bound, or absolute, frame of reference. Fluid speeds along three transects radiating from the center of the fish's mouth were extracted from every two-dimensional vector field. This extraction of speed along all three transects of interest was automated with a custom program written in Visual Basic because the absolute position of the fish, and therefore positions of the transects vary during the strike. The program probed the PIV velocity data, accounting for both the angle of the fish and the position of mouth as determined from manual digitization.
Data validation
Cross-correlation-based PIV algorithms typically return an estimated speed
at every grid point. Evaluating the accuracy of these measurements is
complicated, but uncertainty generally increases as a result of poor seeding
in that region of the image, high velocity gradients, solid boundaries that
scatter light, and particle displacements that are large relative to the size
of the interrogation region. In order to insure that only quality measurements
were used, a two-step validation scheme was implemented.
First, vectors with a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of less than 2.0 were removed, without replacement, and no smoothing was applied to the final velocity field. Some spurious measurements that are not representative of fluid particle displacement still passed the SNR validation criterion. The second step of the validation scheme deals with these spurious vectors. Measurements both directly on the transect (i,j) and at two grid points above (i,j+2) and two grid points below (i,j2) were considered at each horizontal position along the transect. Measurements located 2 grid points away from the primary measurement location are used because these do not overlap the primary measurement region. If at least two of the three measurements considered had not been removed based on the SNR criterion (step one of the validation scheme), then the mean of the remaining measurements was used as the value of speed for that given position along the transect.
This validation scheme resulted in the removal of some measurements near the mouth for all sequences. Measurements near the mouth were the most likely to fail the validation scheme because particle displacements (high fluid speed), velocity gradients, and occasional glare from the predator, were all highest near the fish mouth. The camera frame rate and spatial resolution used for the measurements placed an effective upper limit of measured fluid speed at approximately 1 m s1, corresponding to a 16 pixel displacement between images. For the majority of feedings, all measurements further than 23 mm from the mouth were validated and those further than 5 mm from the mouth were validated for all feedings.
A time series of extracted profiles of speed was inspected to determine the
time of peak fluid speed for each feeding. The extracted transects at the time
of peak fluid speed for multiple feedings were compared. To address the
variation in size of velocity pattern with gape and the strike-to-strike
variation in magnitude of fluid speed, profiles of scaled fluid speed were
compared to one another. Based on either the physical intuition or the form of
the equation for theoretical velocity along the centerline of the existing
theoretical models (equation 25, Muller et
al., 1982), it was reasonable to predict that the size of the
spatial pattern scaled linearly with size of gape and that the magnitude of
fluid speed everywhere would be proportional to fluid speed FS at the
mouth aperture. For each feeding, the profile at the time of peak fluid speed
was scaled by dividing spatial distances by gape at this time and the
magnitude of speed by the measured speed located at a distance of
gape in front of the fish. The speed at this position is used throughout as a
reference because at this location fluid speed is substantial and the PIV
measurements meet the validation criteria described above; it is referred to
as FS
gape from here on. Profiles at this time of
the strike were selected because the high values of fluid speed occurring at
the same time as large gape make this a biologically relevant portion of the
strike.
After scaling, all data from extracted centerline transects for each individual were combined and a fourth order polynomial fit to the data was generated to create a functional representation of the mean scaled speed profile for that individual, SSindividual(x). The square of the correlation coefficient (r2) of this curve fit was calculated to determine the quality of the fit. To quantify the strike-to-strike variation of scaled velocity profiles, measurements were binned together at equally spaced intervals (0.1 scaled distance) along the scaled distance axis and the residuals of all measurements within each bin about the polynomial fit were calculated in order to quantify the variation of the scaled velocity profiles about the mean scaled velocity profile.
In a subsequent analysis all of the data from the three individuals was
combined to create one pooled data set. As was done for each individual, a
polynomial fit was generated for the pooled data,
SSpooled(x), and residuals of measurements about this fit
were binned to quantify the variation about this mean velocity profile.
Additionally, for each individual, the r2 of both the
individual polynomial fit, SSindividual(x), and of the
pooled data polynomial fit, SSpooled(x), to the data
subset consisting of all feedings for the particular individual were
calculated and compared to one another. Lastly, in order to provide a
preliminary evaluation of the theoretical model of Muller et al.
(1982), the
r2 of the Muller centerline equation (equation 25 in
Muller et al., 1982
) to each
individual's data subset and to the pooled data set was calculated. The
theoretical equation was calculated with a mouth diameter of 1 and value of
speed at the aperture of 2.83, which results in the same spatial scaling as
was done with empirical measurements and a value of scaled speed of 1 at a
scaled distance of 0.5.
For one individual the experimental setup was modified to obtain an additional set of measurements in a frontal plane. The same digitization, image processing and extraction of transects was conducted, although instead of using the true value of PG for each sequence a constant value (equal to the mean value of the sequences with a lateral view of the fish, 12 mm) was used because it was not possible to measure peak gape as defined here from the ventral view. The scaled speed profiles were again combined and used to determine mean velocity profiles for the three transects within the mid-frontal plane. All transects share a common intersection at the center of the mouth opening, lying within the plane of the mouth opening. These were compared to mean velocity profiles in the mid-sagittal plane in order to evaluate the symmetry of the flow field about the long axis of the fish.
In a separate analysis of the video sequences of particle motion, the parcel of fluid that was eventually ingested by the fish was determined by manually tracking individual particles. Any particle that entered the predator's mouth at any time between mouth opening and mouth closure was considered ingested. The result of this analysis was the definition of a boundary for which all fluid elements located within the boundary at the beginning of mouth opening were ingested by the fish. All elements lying outside the boundary were not ingested. The volume of this ingested parcel of water was calculated by integration of the two-dimensional boundary, assuming that the flow field is symmetric about the long axis of the fish.
Temporal pattern
The temporal pattern of kinematic events and fluid speeds was investigated
by plotting gape, ram speed, jaw protrusion speed and fluid speed as a
function of time for the duration of every strike. The relative timing of key
kinematic events was determined manually from the graphed profiles of each
feeding. These included start of mouth opening, gape equal to 20% peak gape,
gape equal to 95% peak gape, start and finish of prey capture, and the time of
peak fluid speed at three distances (PG,
PG,
PG) along the centerline transect of the fish. The interval between each
of these and time of 20% peak gape was calculated as a fraction of the time
from 20% peak gape to 95% opening (TTPG) as a first order
approximation, accounting for the variation between fast and slow strikes. The
mean and standard error (S.D.) of each scaled interval
was calculated for all 42 feedings in order to determine the general pattern
of the relative timing of events across individuals and for the entire range
of TTPG reported.
In order to determine the effects of prey type, two-way analyses of
variance (ANOVAs) were performed with prey type and individual as the
independent variables and TTPG, FSPG and
PG as the dependent variables.
The peak fluid speed measured at a distance of peak gape in front
of the fish, FS
PG, was plotted as a function of
measured time to peak gape, TTPG, for every feeding of each
individual. A power line fit was applied to the feedings of each
individual.
Unless otherwise stated, all results are mean ± standard deviation (S.D.).
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
Spatial pattern
The spatial distribution of velocity was primarily dependent on gape and
the magnitude of speed generated at the mouth, such that for a faster strike
(low TTPG), or larger peak gape (PG), there was an increase
in the generated fluid speed everywhere in front of the feeding fish
(Fig. 3A). Scaling the spatial
size by the mouth diameter at the time of peak fluid speed and magnitude of
speed by fluid speed at a reference location located at a distance of
gape in front of the fish (FS
gape) for numerous
feedings demonstrated similarity of the spatial pattern between individuals
over the observed range of peak gape and TTPG
(Fig. 3B). While profiles of
absolute speed varied greatly from feeding to feeding, the scaled profiles
were very similar to one another. A mean scaled velocity profile found by
fitting of a fourth order polynomial fit to the 42 pooled feedings from all
individuals provided a good fit (r2=0.985) to the scaled
fluid centerline profiles from all feedings for this individual (#1), as shown
in Fig. 2B. The
S.D. of residuals of scaled fluid speeds about the mean
scaled velocity profile are shown as error bars in
Fig. 2B and can be seen to
increase in magnitude towards the mouth. This is a result of both increased
magnitude of the scaled speed and increased variation due to uncertainty in
the measurement.
|
|
![]() | (1) |
|
The cross section of the parcel of ingested fluid viewed in the mid-sagittal plane was an ovoid shape that was slightly taller than wide (mean height to width ratio=1.08±0.15), with an overall mean height 1.65±0.2 times that of peak gape, as shown for one feeding in Fig. 6. At the beginning of the strike, the prey was generally located at the center of the ingested volume of fluid. During the strike, jaw protrusion moved the mouth opening forward to a position near the original location of the prey, as shown in the inset to Fig. 6. Of the 30 feedings with a peak gape within ±2 mm of the mean (12.6 mm), the estimated volume of the ingested parcel ranged from 1800 to 6500 mm3. This was equivalent to 0.72.6 times the buccal cavity volume of a bluegill with standard length of 15.1 cm, as estimated from silicone casts of a size series of 15 bluegill sunfish (D. C. Collar, unpublished dataset).
|
Temporal pattern
There was a general temporal pattern of generated fluid speed and key
kinematic measures for all strikes, regardless of TTPG.
FSPG gradually increased and reached a peak value
slightly before the time of peak gape and slightly lagging the time of peak
protrusion speed (Fig. 7). The
magnitude of fluid speed in the strike shown in
Fig. 7B was larger than that of
Fig. 7A both because
PG was larger and TTPG was smaller. The relative timing of
peak fluid speed to peak gape was not a function of TTPG, as the
regression of time from 20% PG to peak fluid speed against time from
20% PG to 95% PG (TTPG) for all 42 feedings was not
significant (P=0.25).
|
The general sequence of events was: start of opening, 20% opening, peak jaw speed, prey entering, peak fluid speed, 95% opening, and maximum jaw protrusion. Peak fluid speeds measured at three locations along the centerline transect all occurred nearly simultaneously with one another and with the time of 95% opening (Fig. 8). Prey capture generally began during mouth opening, at a time when peak jaw protrusion speed were near their maxima and fluid speed had not yet reached its peak. The mean time of the completion of prey ingestion was slightly before the time of peak fluid speed and 95% peak gape. Maximum protrusion occurred simultaneously with the time at which the mouth was open more than 95% of peak gape.
|
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
While both the prior (Ferry-Graham et
al., 2003) and current studies used PIV and bluegill sunfish,
there are numerous methodological improvements in the current study. The use
of a higher frame rate (500 vs 250 Hz) leads to decreased particle
displacement for a given fluid speed and use of a shutter (1/3000 s
vs open shutter, 1/250 s) decreases particle streaking. Both of these
allow for the measurement of higher absolute speeds, which is particularly
necessary near the mouth. The use of a second mirror near the surface of the
tank allowed for the illumination, and therefore measurements, of flow in the
shadows of predator and prey. The use of validation schemes based on all
neighboring points and interpolation of removed vectors, as was done in the
previous study, is problematic near the fish because measured displacements
are of the movement of the fish, not the fluid. The current validation scheme
uses only neighboring points above and below, and therefore not towards the
fish and not in the direction of the gradient of velocity. Additionally, we
did not replace measurements that were removed by the validation scheme.
A major finding of our study was a distinct spatial pattern of flow that
was consistent for all feedings investigated in this study. After dividing
spatial dimensions by the value of gape and the magnitude of fluid speed by
the fluid speed at a fixed location in front of the fish
(FSgape), this single functional relationship of
scaled speed as a function of scaled distance from the mouth was shown to be
accurate across the range of kinematic excursions observed in the study.
Spatially, fluid velocity patterns scale with the size of the mouth aperture.
While the spatial pattern of flow would likely be affected by variation in the
shape of the mouth opening, it is thought that the pattern of fluid velocity
presented here will be very similar in other suction feeders with similarly
circular shaped mouths. It was also shown that the theoretical model for fluid
speed along the centerline of the fish presented by Muller et al.
(1982
) is a good description
of the measured speed. For scaled distances of 0.15 and greater, the
polynomial fit and theoretical model are very similar to one another
(Fig. 3B). As compared to the
polynomial fit, the fluid speed and slope of the theoretical equation decrease
with decreasing scaled distance at scaled distances smaller than 0.15. The
polynomial fit has a maximum slope at the mouth aperture, whereas the
theoretical curve has a slope of 0 at the mouth aperture. Empirical data are
scarce in the area of discrepancy between these curves, so we cannot accept or
reject either of these functions based on the current data set.
The fluid speed into the mouth is a function of the rate of change of volume of the mouth divided by the mouth aperture. The rate of change of volume is proportional to the square of gape and inversely proportional to TTPG. The area of the aperture is proportional to the square of gape, but independent of TTPG. These combined indicate that although absolute speeds (m s1) of kinematic movements are a function of both TTPG and PG, fluid speed is approximately independent of gape, but proportional to TTPG1. TTPG represents a combination of absolute speed of expansion and size of the gape that is directly relevant to fluid speed. A shorter TTPG necessarily corresponds to rapid kinematics. After dividing the absolute times of kinematic events and latencies between these events by TTPG, the temporal pattern of fluid velocity, including the relative timing of peak fluid speed and key kinematic events, was shown to have a distinct pattern that is highly repeatable over the range of parameters investigated. The suction-feeding bluegill can enhance the magnitude of flow speed by increasing the rate of buccal cavity expansion, as indicated in our study by TTPG. After scaling the spatial pattern based on peak gape, approximately 87% of the variation in generated peak fluid speed was accounted for by time required for mouth opening, as quantified here with TTPG. While a first order approximation would predict that fluid speeds were proportional to TTPG1 (speed scales with the inverse of time), the empirical measurements of fluid speed suggest that fluid speed was inversely proportional to TTPG to an exponent less than 1 (range of 0.80 to 0.86 for the three individuals). This suggests a modulation of kinematic pattern of mouth opening that has some dependence on TTPG. Examples include a modulation of the timing of opening of the caudal valves that is correlated with TTPG, or decoupling of the anterior and posterior expansion, where posterior expansion is either slower or smaller in magnitude as a function of decreasing TTPG.
Peak gape and time to peak gape strongly affect the temporal and spatial patterns of flow. After accounting for the effects of these variables, there is a highly repeatable temporal and spatial pattern of flow. The consistent spatial and temporal patterns allow for the estimation of fluid velocities in front of a feeding bluegill based on relatively simple kinematic variables, PG and TTPG. This is a potentially powerful functional relationship, and if future interspecific studies confirm its generality across taxa the relationship would provide a unifying view of the behavioral and morphological diversity of suction feeders.
Drag forces experienced by a prey item that is positioned within a suction
flow will be proportional to the square of fluid velocity, and therefore can
be expected to fall precipitously as a function of distance from the
predator's mouth opening. The decay of water velocity has been observed during
suction feeding by fish using fluid visualization methods
(Ferry-Graham et al., 2003),
although the present study is the first to present a functional relationship
for the decay of velocity based on empirical results. These results confirm
the suggestions that velocity, and therefore forces that result from fluid
velocity, are significant only in the region of approximately one mouth
diameter in front of the fish. Because flow speed falls off so rapidly in
front of the mouth, suction feeders gain little in terms of extending this
flow field by even substantial increases in the fluid speed at the mouth
opening. Instead, the chief advantage of increased flow speed at the mouth may
be the increased magnitude of generated forces within the space very close to
the mouth. The predator may extend the affected area of the flow field by
opening the mouth wider, as we found the size of the velocity field to scale
linearly with peak gape, and to extend the ingested volume further forward by
using ram (Higham et al.,
2005
).
Fluid speed was not constant during the course of the feeding event. The
time of peak fluid speed occurred only slightly before peak gape, and occurred
simultaneously at three positions in front of the predator. The
synchronization of fluid speed and gape is potentially a very effective
feeding strategy because the bluegill simultaneously maximizes flow-induced
forces acting on the prey and the space over which the forces occur. This
result is in contrast to a model of the mouth as an expanding cylinder with no
opercular slits, which leads to peak fluid speed very early in the expansion
and a flow rate at the mouth aperture of zero at peak gape
(van Leeuwen and Muller,
1984a). There are at least two mechanistic explanations for this.
The first is that continued expansion of the posterior portion of the buccal
and opercular cavities after peak expansion of the anterior portion prolongs
the period of volumetric expansion of the total mouth past peak gape. A
distinct delay in the posterior expansion (as measured by suspensory and
opercular abduction) relative to gape was shown consistently throughout
strikes of three species of Lepomis, including L.
macrochirus, by Lauder
(1980b
) suggesting that the
assumption of an evenly expanding cone or cylinder is not accurate. The
anterior to posterior delay of expansion of major functional components of the
head has been shown to hold true across a wide range of taxa
(Lauder, 1982
). The second is
the possibility that the opening of the opercular slits allows fluid to
continue to flow into and through the mouth, driven only by fluid momentum,
after volumetric expansion of the buccal cavity has ceased. When the opercular
slits are closed, the volumetric flow rate into the mouth aperture is exactly
equal to the instantaneous volumetric expansion of the combined buccal and
opercular cavities. After the opercular slits are open, this equality does not
hold and the flow into the mouth is equal to the expansion of the mouth
cavity, in addition to the volumetric flow rate out of the opercular slits. It
is likely that both explanations contribute to the observed relationship.
The finding that peak fluid speed occurs at the time of onset of peak gape
(as characterized by 95% PG) is also in contrast to expectations derived from
more sophisticated models that link buccal expansion to fluid motion. The
model of Muller et al. (1982),
which allows for delayed posterior expansion and flow out of the operculum,
was used to predict the temporal pattern of pressure and fluid speed within
the mouth of four taxa (Salmo, Esox, Gadus and Amia;
van Leeuwen and Muller, 1983
).
For the four species studied, the posterior expansion of the mouth cavity
lagged the anterior expansion, beginning between 30% and 70% of TTPG.
These simulations also allowed for opening of the opercular valves during
buccal expansion, and the timing of this event was determined from kinematic
data extracted from high-speed video for each species. The time of peak fluid
speed at the mouth aperture predicted by the model ranged from 33% to 54% of
the TTPG (data extracted from fig. 24 in
van Leeuwen and Muller, 1983
).
This discrepancy in timing of fluid speed and mouth expansion between the
model and empirical data presented here indicates that existing models are
overly simplistic and do not account for subtleties in how fish actually
manipulate water during suction feeding. While the theoretical model has not
been parameterized for Lepomis, we note that the rostralcaudal
expansion wave, as characterized by simultaneous mouth opening and opercular
expansion, has been characterized and is similar in Lepomis
(Lauder, 1980b
) and
Amia (Lauder, 1980a
).
Given the similar kinematics despite significant morphological and
phylogenetic differences between these two aforementioned species, we suspect
that this kinematic pattern and resulting temporal relationship of fluid speed
to kinematics may be characteristic of all suction-feeding fish.
Buccal casts of a size series of bluegill sunfish (D. C. Collar,
unpublished data) show that the buccal cavity at peak expansion is fairly
accurately described by a cylinder (posterior height equals 102% anterior
height, posterior width equals 108% anterior width). The measurements of total
ingested fluid volume presented here are as high as 260% of the buccal volume
for a fish with the standard length of our specimens, as determined from these
casts. It has been estimated that the total volume entering the head of a
rainbow trout is 5.5 times the volume taken up before opening of opercular and
branchiostegal valves (van Leeuwen and
Muller, 1984a). This large additional volume is too large to be
attributed to additional volume of opercular cavity and is therefore due to
flow exiting the posterior portion of the mouth cavity through the opercular
slits. By controlling the precise timing of mouth expansion and allowing flow
to exit through the operculum during the feeding event, the suction-feeding
fish is able to ingest a volume greater than the volume of the fully expanded
head, which would be the maximum possible with no posterior valves.
![]() |
Acknowledgments |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Adrian, R. J. (1991). Particle imaging techniques for fluid mechanics. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 23,261 -304.[CrossRef]
Aerts, P. (1990). Variability of the fast suction feeding process in Astatotilapia elegans (Teleostei, Cichlidae) a hypothesis of peripheral feedback control. J. Zool. 220,653 -678.
Aerts, P., Osse, J. W. M. and Verraes, W. (1987). Model of jaw depression during feeding in Astatotilapia elegans (Teleostei, Cichlidae) mechanisms for energy-storage and triggering. J. Morphol. 194,85 -109.[CrossRef]
Carroll, A. M., Wainwright, P. C., Huskey, S. H., Collar, D. C.
and Turnigan, R. G. (2004). Morphology predicts
suction feeding performance in centrachid fishes. J. Exp.
Biol. 207,3873
-3881.
De Jong, M. C., Sparenberg, J. A. and DeVries, J. (1987). Some aspects of the hydrodynamics of suction feeding of fish. Fluid Dyn. Res. 2,87 -112.[CrossRef]
Drost, M. R., Muller, M. and Osse, J. W. M. (1988). A quantitative hydrodynamical model of suction feeding in larval fishes: the role of frictional forces. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 234,263 -281.
Ferry-Graham, L. A., Wainwright, P. C. and Lauder, G. V. (2003). Quantification of flow during suction feeding in bluegill sunfish. Zoology 106,159 -168.
Higham, T. E., Day, S. W. and Wainwright, P. C.
(2005). Sucking while swimming: evaluating the effects of ram
speed on suction generation in bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus)
using digital particle image velocimetry. J. Exp.
Biol. 208,2653
-2660.
Lauder, G. V. (1980a). Evolution of feeding mechanism in primitive actinopterygian fishes: a functional anatomical analysis of Polypterus, Lepisosteus and Amia. J. Morphol. 163,283 -317.[CrossRef]
Lauder, G. V. (1980b). The suction feeding mechanism in sunfishes (Lepomis): an experimental analysis. J. Exp. Biol. 88,49 -72.
Lauder, G. V. (1982). Patterns of evolution in the feeding mechanism of actinopterygian fishes. Am. Zool. 22,275 -285.
Lauder, G. V. and Clark, B. D. (1984). Water flow patterns during prey capture by teleost fishes. J. Exp. Biol. 113,143 -150.
Liem, K. F. (1973). Modulatory multiplicity in the feeding mechanism in cichlid fishes, as exemplified by the invertebrate pickers of Lake Tanganyika. J. Zool. 189,93 -125.
Muller, M. and Osse, J. W. M. (1984). Hydrodynamics of suction feeding fish. Trans. Zool. Soc. Lond. 37,51 -135.
Muller, M. and van Leeuwen, J. L. (1985). The flow in front of the mouth of a prey capturing fish. In Fortschritte der Zoologie, Band 30 Functional Morphology in Vertebrates, vol. 30 (ed. H. R. Duncker and G. Fleischer). Stuttgart W. Germany: Gustav Fischer Verlag.
Muller, M., Osse, J. W. M. and Verhagen, J. H. G. (1982). A quantitative hydrodynamical model of suction feeding in fish. J. Theor. Biol. 95, 49-79.[CrossRef]
Norton, S. F. (1991). Capture success and diet of cottid fishes the role of predator morphology and attack kinematics. Ecology 72,1807 -1819.
Norton, S. F. and Brainerd, E. L. (1993).
Convergence in the feeding mechanics of ecomorphologically similar species in
the Centrarchidae and Cichlidae. J. Exp. Biol.
176, 11-29.
Nyberg, D. W. (1971). Prey capture in largemouth bass. Amer. Mid. Nat. 86,128 -144.
Sanford, C. P. J. and Wainwright, P. C. (2002). Use of sonomicrometry demonstrates the link between prey capture kinematics and suction pressure in largemouth bass. J. Exp. Biol. 205,3445 -3457.[Medline]
Scarano, F. and Reithmuller, M. L. (1999). Iterative multigrid approach in PIV image processing with discrete window offset. Exp. Fluids 26,513 -523.[CrossRef]
Svanback, R., Wainwright, P. C. and Ferry-Graham, L. A. (2002). Linking cranial kinematics, buccal pressure, and suction feeding performance in largemouth bass. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 75,532 -543.[CrossRef][Medline]
van Leeuwen, J. L. and Muller, M. (1983). The recording and interpretation of pressures in prey-sucking fish. Neth. J. Zool. 33,425 -475.
van Leeuwen, J. L. and Muller, M. (1984a). A quantitative study of flow in prey capture by rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri, with general consideration of the actinopterygian feeding mechanism. Trans. Zool. Soc. London 37,171 -227.
van Leeuwen, J. L. and Muller, M. (1984b). Optimum sucking techniques for predatory fish. Trans. Zool. Soc. London 37,137 -169.
Weihs, D. (1980). Hydrodynamics of suction feeding fish in motion. J. Fish Biol. 16,425 -433.