The influence of flow velocity on the response of rheophilic fish to visual cues

The strong association with visual cues exhibited by fish that prefer to inhabit flowing water (rheophilic species) may help reduce the energetic costs of maintaining position due to the provision of spatial points of reference. If this Station Holding Hypothesis is true, a positive relationship between the association with visual cues and flow velocity is expected. This hypothesis was tested experimentally by quantifying the response of common minnow (Phoxinus phoxinus) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) to visual cues under three flow velocities. In contradiction to the prediction, there was no evidence that the association with strong visual cues was positively related to flow velocity when fish were presented with vertical black stripes in an open channel flume, although interspecific variation in response was observed. The association with visual cues was relatively weak in trout, compared to minnow that spent 660% more time associated with the zone in which visual cues were present during the treatment, than the control when visual cues were absent. Trout tended to be more exploratory and made short visits to the area where visual cues were present, whereas minnow associated with the cues for longer. The strong association with visual cues independent of flow velocity exhibited by minnow and the weak association across all velocities by trout suggest that this behaviour is unlikely to reflect a strategy to minimise the energetic cost of maintaining position in flowing water. Minnow may have used the visual cues as a proxy indicator of physical structure that provides alternative benefits, such as refuge from predators. Trout may have employed alternative cues (e.g. mechanosensory) to seek more energetically favourable regions of the experimental area, reducing the importance of stationary visual stimuli.

Automated summary

Fish that prefer flowing water have a strong association with visual cues, which may help reduce the energy cost of maintaining position. However, an experimental study found no positive relationship between visual cues and flow velocity in common minnow and brown trout. Minnow showed a stronger association with visual cues and spent more time in the zone with cues, while trout showed weaker association and shorter visits. This suggests that minnow may use visual cues as refuge from predators, while trout may rely on alternative cues to seek energetically favorable regions.