|
| |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online October 5, 2006
Journal of Experimental Biology 209, 4077-4090 (2006)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2006
doi: 10.1242/jeb.02487
The role of the lateral line and vision on body kinematics and hydrodynamic preference of rainbow trout in turbulent flow
Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA
Present address: Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, Seeley Mudd Building, Room W101, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA (e-mail: jl10{at}cornell.edu)
Accepted 10 August 2006
 |
Summary |
|---|
 TOP Summary IntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Key words: lateral line, vision, turbulence, kinematics, behavioral choice, Kármán gait, entraining, rainbow trout, vortices, cobalt chloride
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
;
Pavlov et al., 2000). However,
under certain flow conditions fishes have shown an ability to exploit unsteady
flows to enhance swimming performance, thereby turning an environmental
constraint into a benefit (Breder,
1965; Hinch and Rand,
2000; Streitlien and
Triantafyllou, 1996; Webb,
1998; Weihs,
1973). Recent studies have found that trout swimming in an
experimentally generated vortex street showed unique kinematics, termed the
Kármán gait, which is accompanied by a decrease in red axial
muscle activity (Liao, 2004;
Liao et al., 2003a). The
Kármán gait illustrates the ability of fish to recycle fluid
momentum from oscillating flows to exploit a passive mechanism of thrust
generation (Beal et al., 2006;
Liao, 2004). Yet while the
intrinsic compliance of the musculoskeletal system can facilitate the passive
use of vortices, it is clear that to maintain this behavior for an appreciable
amount of time requires active control. Any comprehensive study aimed at
understanding how the physical environment influences organismal behavior must
integrate biomechanics with how organisms sense and process their dynamic
environment. This approach serves as an entry point to better understand the
basis of higher order processing such as the ability to choose habitats.
Complex water currents are common in nature, can be detected by the lateral
line (Engelmann et al., 2002;
Engelmann et al., 2003;
Mogdans and Bleckmann, 1998;
Montgomery et al., 2003;
Vogel and Bleckmann, 2000),
and exert a large affect on swimming kinematics and behavior
(Fausch, 1993;
Gerstner, 1998;
Heggenes, 2002;
Liao et al., 2003a;
McLaughlin and Noakes, 1998;
Webb, 1993;
Webb, 1998). However,
surprisingly little is known about how turbulence levels affect the
sensorimotor control of freely swimming fishes.
Fishes are able to detect hydrodynamic pressure differences created by flow
velocity gradients with the mechanosensory hair cells of their lateral line
system (Coombs et al., 1989;
Dijkgraaf, 1963). The ability
of the lateral line to encode hydrodynamic information plays a critical role
in many fundamental behaviors such as rheotaxis
(Dijkgraaf, 1963;
Kanter and Coombs, 2002;
Montgomery et al., 1997),
predator avoidance (Blaxter and Fuiman,
1989), prey detection and capture
(Conley and Coombs, 1998;
Coombs et al., 2001;
Montgomery and Coombs, 1998)
and schooling behavior (Pitcher et al.,
1976). The broad utility of the lateral line system stems from two
different receptor classes, which are sensitive to different flow
characteristics (Coombs et al.,
1989), providing the ability to detect hydrodynamic stimuli even
in the presence of background flow
(Engelmann et al., 2000).
Though it is tempting to speculate that the ability to sense and control
body-generated vortices may enhance the efficiency of undulatory locomotion,
the data suggest that the kinematics (S. Coombs, E. Anderson, J. Montgomery
and M. Grosenbaugh, personal communication) and performance
(Dijkgraaf, 1963) of freely
swimming fish in uniform flow remain unaffected when the lateral line is
blocked. Electrophysiology experiments on paralyzed, aquatic vertebrates show
a default pattern of sequential, rostocaudal motor activity that proceeds
without any sensory feedback (Masino and
Fetcho, 2005; Soffe,
1993). Thus, the known function of the lateral line as a flow
detector is seemingly at odds with its non-essential role during swimming in
uniform flow (this should not to be confused with initiation of swimming). It
is possible that perturbed flows provide a more revealing context to determine
the role of the lateral line during locomotion. We currently lack any
kinematic data of freely swimming fishes in the presence of known hydrodynamic
perturbations (but see Montgomery et al.,
2003; Sutterlin and Waddy,
1975), which precludes us from understanding what type of
hydrodynamic information the lateral line provides in turbulent conditions. By
exposing fish to periodic vortices shed behind a cylinder in the light and
dark, this study addresses a fundamental question about which sensory cues are
important to accommodate unsteady flows and how this affects the selection of
hydrodynamic habitats.
Like most vertebrates, fishes are predominantly visual animals and can rely
on vision to initiate and modulate locomotion
(Douglas et al., 1989;
Fernald and Wright, 1985;
Hobson et al., 1981;
Roeser and Baier, 2003). Yet
behaviors are almost always shaped by multiple sensory modalities and studies
have recognized the importance of simultaneous contributions of vision and the
lateral line during locomotion (Janssen
and Corcoran, 1993; Montgomery
et al., 2003; Partridge and
Pitcher, 1980; Sutterlin and
Waddy, 1975). A goal of this study was to determine how the
lateral line and vision affect the ability and preference of fishes to swim in
the hydrodynamic flow environments established around a stationary cylinder
placed in uniform flow. For example, are Kármán gaiting fish
relying on their lateral line to generate corrective motions to maintain
position in vortical flows? This study investigates whether trout
significantly alter Kármán gait kinematics when either the
lateral line or vision is blocked. In addition, it examined how the presence
or absence of the lateral line and vision affects the preference of fish to
associate with different hydrodynamic environments around a stationary
cylinder in flow.
|
Materials and methods |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Pharmacological block of the lateral line
Fish were exposed to 0.15 mmol l–1 cobalt hexachloride
(Sigma-Aldrich Corp., St Louis, MO, USA) in calcium-free de-ionized water
(15°C) for 3–4 h to block specifically the mechanosensory hair cells
of the superficial and canal neuromasts without affecting the function of the
inner ear (Karlsen and Sand,
1987). The minimum concentration of cobalt chloride (J. Engelmann,
personal communication) and exposure time
(Baker and Montgomery, 1999;
Montgomery et al., 1997)
needed to block the lateral line were initially obtained from the literature.
Since fish were exercised after the cobalt treatment, concentrations and
exposure times needed to be adjusted from previous studies in which fish were
not exercised. These values were empirically adjusted by systematically
exposing trout (N=12) to varying cobalt concentrations and exposure
times with the following criteria; (1) fish would survive after the experiment
and resume normal swimming and feeding activity within 3 days, and (2) fish
would display an escape response to a sudden jet of water from a syringe prior
to treatment but not after.
Pharmacological blocking of the lateral line has been widely used
(Baker and Montgomery, 1999;
Coombs et al., 2001;
Janssen and Corcoran, 1993;
Montgomery et al., 1997) and
is less invasive and more comprehensive than physically severing the lateral
line nerve (Dijkgraaf, 1973).
Care must be exercised to avoid negatively affecting the health of the fish,
since toxic side effects may alter behavior, which is then erroneously
attributed to a blocked lateral line (see
Janssen, 2000). The applied
concentration of a pharmacological agent should be experimentally titrated and
monitored so that it reveals an effect, as determined by a behavioral or
physiological assay, but is not detrimental to the health of the fish. For
example, treated fish in this study often fed during the experiment, providing
independent verification that normal behaviors remained intact after
treatment.
To confirm that the cobalt chloride treatment blocked the lateral line, before each experiment a hand-operated syringe was slowly positioned behind a treated fish swimming steadily in uniform flow. A 30 ml jet of water was quickly discharged at the caudal half of the body to elicit an escape response (Fig. 1). Since the experimental flow tank did not contain cobalt chloride, after an experiment (typically 1–3 h) the response of the fish to a jet of water was again recorded to ensure that the cobalt treatment had not yet worn off. Kármán gait kinematics and body position relative to the cylinder were recorded for all four experimental treatments.
|
Infrared experiments
Two 20x20 infrared (IR) light emitting diode (LED) arrays (850 nm, BG
Micro Co., Garland, TX, USA) were used to illuminate a white Plexiglas
background above the flow tank. This wavelength was chosen because the retinal
cones of rainbow trout cannot detect wavelengths above 750 nm
(Hawryshyn and Harosi, 1994).
A Sony DVR TR-38 Nightshot Camcorder (30 frames s–1) aimed at
a 45° front-surface mirror placed below the flow tank recorded the ventral
view of the trout against the IR-lit background. The camcorder imaged the
entire working area of the flow tank (25x80 cm), and custom written
software (Image Acquisition Toolbox, Matlab v6.5; Mathworks, Natick, MA, USA)
continuously recorded the position of the head every 5 s for 1 h to obtain
positional preference data. An IR-sensitive Redlake camera (60 frames
s–1, 1/125th second shutter speed; Tucson, AZ, USA) imaged
the region of the vortex street behind the cylinder to capture detailed
Kármán gait kinematics. For experiments performed in the dark,
the IR-sensitive camcorder and Redlake camera were controlled by a PC laptop
and desktop, respectively, in a partitioned side of the experimental room to
remove potential visual cues from the LCD monitors (room illuminance <0.015
cd m–2). In addition, a black Plexiglas sheet covered the
lateral side of the flow tank to make certain that fish could not use any
visual cues to aid in station holding relative to the cylinder. The black
Plexiglas sheet was removed for the light experiments.
Experimental protocol
A Kármán vortex street was generated at a Reynolds number of
18 000 by placing a 5 cm, D-section cylinder in a uniform current of 42 cm
s–1 (or 2.5 L s–1, where L
is the total length of the fish). Experiments consisted of four treatments,
intentionally conducted in the following non-random sequence: control fish
possessing vision with a functional lateral line tested on day 1 (abbreviated
V+L+1), fish without vision with a functional lateral line tested
on day 1 (V–L+1), fish with vision without a functional
lateral line on day 2 (V+L–2), and fish without vision and a
functional lateral line on day 2 (V–L–2). Fish were
first tested in the control treatment to confirm that they could
Kármán gait as in previous studies
(Liao et al., 2003a;
Liao et al., 2003b). Paired
light/dark treatments on trout with an intact lateral line (V+L+1
and V–L+1) were performed sequentially in the mid-afternoon
of the first experimental day. Fish were then taken out of the flow tank and
placed in a holding chamber overnight. Paired tests on trout with a blocked
lateral line in the light and dark (V+L–2 and
V–L–2, respectively) were conducted the following day.
The sequence of cobalt chloride treatment was not randomized because the
recovery time after treatment with cobalt chloride varies from days to weeks
(Karlsen and Sand, 1987;
Montgomery et al., 1997).
Testing fish with a blocked lateral line first would introduce variance in the
start times of subsequent treatments and thus fish size, because of growth.
Since Kármán gait kinematics and preference are most sensitive
to the ratio of body length to cylinder diameter, significant growth would
confound the results. One implicit assumption in these experiments is that
fish with a blocked lateral line did not retain a spatial image of the
relative position of the cylinder in the flow tank from the previous day. To
test the assumption that fish do not alter swimming kinematics due to previous
exposure to the experimental setup, the kinematics for control fish
(N=4 fish) were collected on two successive days (V+L+1
and V+L+2) and compared. This is important when comparing
experiments between fish with an intact lateral line (conducted on day 1) and
cobalt-exposed fish (conducted on day 2), in which days of exposure to the
experimental setup is a confounding factor. By controlling for prior
experience to the experimental setup, kinematic comparisons made between
treatments only reflect manipulation of light and the ability to sense flow
with the lateral line. Similar to the V+L+1 fish, the
V+L+2 fish were statistically compared to all other treatments.
Data analysis
The following kinematic variables were measured as in previous studies
(Liao et al., 2003a;
Liao et al., 2003b;
Liao, 2004): lateral amplitude
of the head, center of mass (COM), and tail tip relative to the body midline,
maximum head angle relative to the x axis (long axis of the flow tank), body
wavelength, downstream distance from the cylinder, body wave speed, maximum
curvature, and tail-beat frequency. The COM was determined
post-mortem for each fish by iteratively balancing the body between
right and left side pins. Body wavelength was obtained by dividing the wave
speed (determined by tracking the maxima of each wave crest as it passed down
the body) by the tail-beat frequency, where tail-beat frequency was calculated
by averaging at least four consecutive tail-beats over a known time. A
customized Matlab program was then used to plot the position of the head
relative to the cylinder every five seconds for 1 h (N=4 fish) to
assess the preference of fish to hold station in a vortex street. Fish were
categorized as `entraining' if the head was positioned in a predetermined
rectangular region to either side and just downstream of the cylinder (each
region was 7x15 cm), and as `Kármán gaiting' if the head
was positioned in a rectangular region centered 20 cm downstream of the
cylinder (10x15 cm).
Statistical tests
The four treatments cannot be considered independent since the same
individuals are used for each treatment. Therefore, paired t-tests
were used to determine differences in the means of the various kinematic
variables between treatments, where each mean value for each individual is the
average of four tail-beats. Probability plots were generated for all datasets
to test for the assumption of normality (not shown). Sequential Bonferroni
corrections were performed to account for multiple paired tests and the alpha
level adjusted accordingly at 
=0.05
(Rice, 1989). Means and
standard errors were calculated for all variables. All statistical tests were
performed in Systat version 9 for the PC.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Kármán gaiting trout in the control treatment adopted a
tail-beat frequency similar to the vortex shedding frequency of the cylinder
and a body wavelength that was longer than the wake wavelength, consistent
with previous studies (Liao et al.,
2003a; Liao et al.,
2003b). Certain kinematic variables did not vary significantly
regardless of whether vision and/or the lateral line was blocked. For example,
average tail-beat frequency and maximum head angle was not statistically
different across treatments (Fig.
2A,B; P>0.43, N=16 tail-beats for four fish;
Table 1). Note that these
values are relatively similar in pattern but lower than for previous studies
where the fish length was lower and the current velocity was higher
(Liao et al., 2003b).
|
|
Blocking the lateral line altered all other Kármán gait kinematic variables measured, compared to trout with an intact lateral line. Trout with a blocked lateral line Kármán gait further downstream relative to the cylinder than trout with an intact lateral line, regardless of whether the experiment is performed in the light or the dark, though this difference is only significant in the dark (Fig. 2C; P<0.009, N=16 tail-beats for four fish). Kármán gaiting trout with a blocked lateral line in the dark adopted a longer and more variable body wavelength than day 1 control fish (Fig. 3A; 2.19±0.2 vs 1.71±0.04 L, P<0.002, N=16 tail-beats for four fish). Note that standard error is shown but standard deviation, the true measure of variance, exhibits the same relative relationship since sample sizes are equal for all treatments. A blocked lateral line also caused the body wave to travel faster towards the tail (Fig. 3B; 3.80±0.2 L s–1 in the dark and 3.49±0.2 L s–1 in the light, vs 2.95±0.06 for the day 1 control treatment, P<0.002, N=16 tail-beats for four fish). There were no differences in lateral head amplitude across treatments (Fig. 3C), but trout with a blocked lateral line displayed a significantly lower tail tip amplitude in the dark (0.15±0.01 L) than trout with an intact lateral line in the dark (0.19±0.01 L, P<0.04, N=16 tail-beats for four fish) and in the light (0.19±0.01 L, P<0.003, N=16 tail-beats for four fish). Lateral COM amplitude followed the same relationship of significance across treatments as the tail tip amplitude. Compared to control fish, maximum body curvatures were lower when both vision and lateral line were blocked (Fig. 4; 1.75±0.07 1/L in the day 1 control treatment vs 1.46±0.09 1/L, P<0.03, N=16 tail-beats for four fish). In addition, fish with an intact lateral line in the dark have a significantly higher body curvature than fish with a blocked lateral line in the light (Fig. 4; 1.92±0.07 1/L vs 1.43±0.11 1/L, P<0.05, N=16 tail-beats for four fish).
|
|
The effects of vision and the lateral line on the preference for trout to Kármán gait or entrain
Trout showed a preference for holding station at different hydrodynamic
locations around the cylinder, either entraining or Kármán
gaiting (Fig. 5A,B), depending
on which sensory cues were available. The lack of a regular pattern of axial
undulation during entraining (Fig.
5A) differs dramatically from the large amplitude body motions
seen during Kármán gaiting
(Fig. 5B). In the light, trout
with a functional lateral line (Fig.
6A; V+L+1) spent the majority of time
Kármán gaiting whereas in the dark trout preferred to entrain
(Fig. 6B;
V–L+1). When the lateral line was blocked, fish in the light
would still Kármán gait (Fig.
6C; V+L–2). Note the variation in behavior across
individuals; some of these fish entrained
(Fig. 6C, orange and green
circles). Blocking vision and the lateral line
(Fig. 6D;
V–L–2) caused all fish to entrain. Thus, regardless of
lateral line functionality, in the absence of light fish prefer to entrain
over Kármán gaiting. When data from all fish are pooled together
(Fig. 7), the proportion of
time spent Kármán gaiting in the light was larger for fish with
an intact lateral line (V+L+1; 50 out of 60 min, or 83% of the
experiment duration) than for those with a blocked lateral line
(V+L–2; 25 out of 60 min, or 41% of the experiment duration).
The overall pattern is that trout will choose to Kármán gait
whenever it is light. In the dark, fish prefer to entrain than to
Kármán gait. This occurs both with (V–L+1; 40
out of 60 min, or 67% of the experiment duration) and without
(V–L–2; 44 out of 60 min, or 73% of the experiment
duration) a functional lateral line (Fig.
7). Trout with both vision and an intact lateral line
(Fig. 8A; V+L+1)
begin to Kármán gait in the vortex street quickly after being
introduced to the flow tank for the first time. This ability to initiate and
maintain Kármán gaiting behavior is diminished when the
experiment is performed in the dark (Fig.
8B; V–L+1). For example, fish start
Kármán gaiting at the beginning of the experiment but then
change to entraining at various times. When the lateral line is blocked, fish
with vision will divide their time more equally between Kármán
gaiting and entraining (Fig.
8C; V+L–2). When both vision and the lateral line
are blocked (Fig. 8D;
V–L–2), fish predominately entrain but occasionally
explore other regions of the flow tank, including Kármán gaiting
in the vortex street. Entraining fish with an intact lateral line showed a
tendency to alternate between right and left sides of the cylinder
(Fig. 9A), whereas the same
fish entraining with a blocked lateral line tended to remain on one side of
the cylinder for the entire experiment
(Fig. 9B).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
The relative roles of vision and lateral line feedback on the kinematics of the Kármán gait
What roles do vision and the lateral line play in the ability to exploit
vortices in a cylinder wake? This question is further complicated given that,
for short periods of time, no sensory feedback is needed for a fish to move
against the downstream flow in an oscillating vortex street. Theoretically,
the hydrodynamic conditions of an oscillating wake make it possible for any
foil-shaped object of the appropriate size to generate thrust passively
(Bose and Lien, 1990;
Wu and Chwang, 1975).
Experimental evidence shows that a dead trout towed behind a cylinder can
momentarily synchronize its body kinematics to the oscillating flow of a
vortex street to generate thrust (Beal et
al., 2006; Liao,
2004). Passive thrust generation to hold station or move upstream
relative to the earth frame of reference is a transient phenomenon because
vortex streets are inherently turbulent. For a fish to remain in the cylinder
wake for sustained periods requires sensory feedback from vision or the
lateral line to facilitate body and fin control.
Fishes rely on both visual (Ingle,
1971; Roeser and Baier,
2003) and hydrodynamic (Coombs
et al., 2001; Dijkgraaf,
1963; Engelmann et al.,
2000) cues to adapt their swimming movements to their immediate
environment. Kármán gait kinematics change when the lateral line
is blocked, indicating that hydrodynamic feedback is used to alter motor
output accordingly in turbulent flows. The greater variability in body
wavelength for trout with a blocked versus intact lateral line
underscores the importance of detecting local flow along the body in adjusting
Kármán gait kinematics to maintain a favorable posture to
facilitate vortex capture. In addition, trout with a blocked lateral line hold
station further downstream from the cylinder than fish with an intact lateral
line. These findings demonstrate that at least some proportion of
Kármán gait kinematics are under active control and they are not
the sole result of passive buffeting of the body by vortices. Longer body
wavelength and faster wave speed suggest that Kármán gaiting is
less efficient or more energetically costly without a functional lateral line.
The fact that trout in the light with a blocked lateral line do not spend as
much time Kármán gaiting as trout with a functional lateral line
(Fig. 7) provides behavioral
evidence in support of this hypothesis. Whether altered Kármán
gait kinematics reflect muscle activity and changes in energy expenditure for
the individual is currently not known. When lateral line functionality is held
constant (i.e. within fish with an intact or blocked lateral line), the
presence or absence of light does not change Kármán gait
kinematics. This provides further evidence that when trout hold station in a
vortex street the lateral line, rather than vision, plays a larger role in
body kinematics.
One exception occurs where vision alone can alter Kármán gait kinematics. Fish with a blocked lateral line in the dark have a greater variability in body wavelength than fish in the light. These fish seem to have more difficulty exploiting vortices, often drifting position within the vortex street, displaying `corrective' motions, or switching to traditional undulatory swimming such as seen in uniform flow. Vision allows fish to maintain a consistent position relative to the cylinder. This may minimize the exposure to flow variation and thus variation in body wavelength, since the predictability and energy of the vortices decreases with downstream distance from the cylinder.
Applications of vortex capture in swimming fishes
This study investigates how the lateral line affects the ability to use
environmental vortices to benefit swimming performance. Similarly, the ability
of a swimming fish to sense and presumably control self-generated vortices
from its undulating body could increase swimming efficiency. To test the
hypothesis that detection of self-generated vortices plays a role in steady
swimming kinematics, one would need to compare swimming behavior of fish with
and without a blocked lateral line. When Dijkgraff (Dijkgraff, 1963) performed
such experiments he found that lateral line ablation did not cause gross
differences in the swimming performance of cyprinids in uniform current if
visual cues existed, indicating that the motions of steady swimming are
feedforward and can proceed in the absence of hydrodynamic feedback. Strouhal
number, a metric for swimming efficiency that uses tail-beat frequency, also
does not deviate in the absence of a functional lateral line (S. Coombs,
personal communication). Another line of evidence comes from the preservation
of a stereotypical swimming motor pattern in paralyzed preparations of
undulatory aquatic vertebrates, in which no self-generated hydrodynamic
stimuli can exist (Grillner,
1985; Sillar and Roberts,
1988). Presumably the ability to sense body-bound vortices is not
necessary to establish the gross motor pattern of swimming, but in the absence
of detailed kinematics and physiological measurements the role of the lateral
line in affecting undulatory efficiency cannot be ruled out. Based on the
available experimental data, a blocked lateral line noticeably alters swimming
kinematics in turbulent but not uniform flow. Though both Kármán
gaiting and steady swimming involve body–vortex interactions the
vortices in each situation can differ in size and strength. Vortices generated
by the body during swimming are probably smaller and weaker than
cylinder-generated vortices used in this study, and as such may not be easily
detected or even ignored by the lateral line. The ability to cancel
self-generated noise in order to be sensitive to biologically important
signals from the environment has been well documented for the lateral line and
other modalities (Bell, 2001;
New and Bodznick, 1990). It is
possible that fish are able to anticipate the progression of self-generated
vortices down the body but that this information is not translated into a
change in swimming motor output unless there is a strong enough flow
perturbation to warrant a kinematic response. In light of these previous
studies we can understand why the general pattern of axial undulation during
steady swimming does not depend on hydrodynamic feedback, especially if visual
cues are available to use to hold station in the earth frame of reference.
The cylinder vortices used in this study are larger and stronger than
body-generated vortices during steady swimming
(Nauen and Lauder, 2002).
Cylinder vortices cause deviations from steady swimming motions because they
may be more readily detected and elicit a motor response. Direct recordings
from the lateral line nerve indeed show a sensitivity to environmental
vortices (Chagnaud et al.,
2006). However, electromyography data reveal that these signals
may not translate into muscle activity along most of the body
(Liao, 2004). Alternatively,
vortices that have enough momentum to move the fish relative to the earth
frame of reference can cause changes in swimming motions. This can occur
independently from hydrodynamic sensing by the lateral line, as seen when a
dead fish is towed behind a cylinder
(Liao, 2004). In the case of
this study, Kármán gaiting involves a combination of active and
passive mechanisms. The lateral line is probably involved in relaying selected
information from the vortex street to guide active body and fin movements,
since kinematic changes only occur when the lateral line is blocked. Since
turbulent flows can destabilize swimming trajectories and increase the cost of
locomotion, the ability to sense vortices is probably at a premium
(Enders et al., 2003;
Pavlov et al., 2000;
Webb, 2004).
To Kármán gait or not to Kármán gait?
When trout hold position in a vortex street their body kinematics are more
influenced by blocking the lateral line than by blocking vision. But how do
these sensory modalities affect the decision to hold station in a
vortex street instead of other regions around a cylinder? Trout will
Kármán gait when visual cues are available, independent of
whether or not the lateral line is intact or blocked (Figs
6,
7,
8). This suggests that fish can
Kármán gait using vision alone. Indeed, Dijkgraaf
(Dijkgraaf, 1963) observed
early on that "the visual system appears to be the most likely sensory
channel to provide fish with a reference point as an indicator of body
displacement." He found that given visual cues the presence or absence
of a functional lateral line made no difference in the ability to display a
rheotactic response. Much like fish swimming in steady flows, fish
predominantly use vision to orient themselves in unsteady currents in the wake
of bluff bodies. In the case of this study, trout are visually orienting to
the cylinder in order to hold station at a consistent downstream region of the
vortex street. It is unlikely that trout visually detected vortices since the
water did not contain obvious particulate matter or air bubbles.
In the dark, trout do not choose to spend much time in the vortex street, even when they possess an intact lateral line. Thus, a functional lateral line alone does not enable fish to exploit the vortex street. The lateral line seems to promote the tendency to explore the surrounding hydrodynamic environment, perhaps to find a global rather than local region of favorable flow. Presumably, the feedback control required to maintain position in a turbulent vortex street requires more than just the ability to sense and respond to flows from moment to moment. These data suggest that vision is more influential than the lateral line in determining the preference to associate with a vortex street (Fig. 7). In reality, trout probably depend on both the lateral line and vision to Kármán gait.
Entraining near the suction zone
The initial goal of this study was to investigate the effects of sensory
input on the kinematics of Kármán gaiting. However, during the
course of the experiments fish in the dark displayed a general avoidance of
the vortex street, instead choosing to entrain close to the cylinder.
Entrainment takes advantage of the low pressure suction region that forms
immediately behind a cylinder in flow and extends approximately two cylinder
diameters downstream from the cylinder
(Zdravkovich, 1997). Studies
have previously documented entraining for several species
(Montgomery et al., 2003;
Sutterlin and Waddy, 1975;
Webb, 1998). Note that these
studies did not document Kármán gaiting. This is most likely
because they used lower flow velocities and smaller diameter cylinders, thus
effectively giving fish the option only to entrain. Since the flow velocity
and ratio of cylinder diameter to fish length are the key factors in eliciting
the Kármán gait, altering these variables will alter the pattern
of the shed vortices and subsequently affect the position fish adopt around a
cylinder. The reason why trout in this study entrained almost exclusively in
the dark and not in the light is not known, but may have to do with factors
unrelated to hydrodynamics, which will be explored in a subsequent
section.
Previous studies have shown that both the canal and superficial neuromasts
of the lateral line system are required for obstacle entrainment
(Montgomery et al., 2003;
Sutterlin and Waddy, 1975),
and that selective ablation of either neuromast type results in fish spending
less time entraining. Sutterlin and Waddy
(Sutterlin and Waddy, 1975)
viewed the suction region as a discontinuity with the downstream flow and
hypothesized that trout were able to hold station by using the posterior
lateral line to detect this flow difference along the body. In support of this
hypothesis trout in this study show no rhythmic body undulations when
entraining, holding the body straight and at an angle (approximately 15°
relative to the x axis; Fig.
5A) and correcting for perturbations by using their fins. The lack
of body undulation could also serve to minimize self-generated hydrodynamic
noise. This explanation implies that the body of the trout is sampling the
pressure difference across its body to maintain position relative to the
cylinder. If this is the case then smaller fish that cannot span the suction
region, and thus not detect the edges of flow discontinuity, should find it
more difficult to entrain.
Future experiments could selectively block one neuromast type to assess its
role in Kármán gaiting. Is there a division of function between
neuromasts types as seen in other behaviors such as rheotaxis
(Montgomery et al., 1997) and
prey detection (Coombs et al.,
2001)? Canal neuromasts have been shown to be able to detect local
flows from a background of constant current velocity
(Chagnaud et al., 2006;
Engelmann et al., 2000). Thus,
although the hydrodynamics of a cylinder wake has both velocity and
acceleration components (Zdravkovich,
1997), the prediction is that acceleration-sensitive canal
neuromasts would play a larger role in determining how fish alter
Kármán gait kinematics
(Coombs et al., 1989). Thus,
species that have a relatively higher density of canal neuromasts should be
more willing to swim in turbulent flows than species that have a higher
density of superficial neuromasts
(Engelmann et al., 2002).
Station holding without visual and hydrodynamic cues
In their natural habitat trout probably use multiple sensory modalities to
hold station in turbulent flows. This paper shows that trout with vision but a
blocked lateral line can still Kármán gait continuously, albeit
with significantly different kinematics than control fish, illustrating how
one sensory modality can compensate for the loss of another one to preserve a
given behavior. Similarly, Dijkgraaf
(Dijkgraaf, 1963) found that
removal of the pars superior of the vestibular organ drastically affected
swimming behavior, which after time was restored back to normal if fish
possessed vision. One might predict that if trout in this study were given
several weeks to allow compensation for an ablated sensory modality, the
ability and preference to Kármán gait would be more similar
across treatments.
This study demonstrates that fish can entrain even in the absence of
hydrodynamic and visual cues, indicating that another mechanism must exist to
explain how fish hold station near the suction region created by a bluff body.
The most likely explanation is that fish may be using other sensory inputs
besides vision and the lateral line to entrain. For example, sound cues
generated by vortices shed from a cylinder, analogous to the vortex-induced
Aeolian tunes generated when wind moves past telephone wires
(Etkin et al., 1957), could be
used to hold station relative to a cylinder. Alternatively, fish may be
relying on the detection of flow-induced accelerations of the body. The
suction region directly behind a cylinder is a simpler, less variable flow
environment compared with the oscillating flow of a turbulent vortex street.
Because of this, fish can entrain indefinitely without feedback from the
lateral line or vision, unlike for Kármán gaiting. Although
muscle spindles have not been identified in fish, presumably fish have the
ability to sense whether they are contracting their muscles. Auditory cues, if
additionally combined with the vestibular system and proprioreceptive feedback
from motor output, could provide sufficient information to maintain a constant
spatial relationship with the cylinder in the absence of vision and the
lateral line.
Entraining may exploit a passive mechanism for thrust generation such that the angled body acts as a lift-producing foil to serve a biomechanical rather than sensory function. The observation that the angled body posture is adopted even when fish cannot detect hydrodynamic stimuli lends support to this reasoning. To maintain in this position relative to the cylinder without body undulation, fish display frequent fin motions with no clear pattern of activity. In this way fish can maintain position relative to the cylinder by balancing the lift force that draws the body upstream with the drag force that pulls the body downstream. The mechanism underlying entraining has not been investigated and would benefit from quantitative flow visualization techniques.
Choosing to Kármán gait rather than entrain
Entraining probably requires minimal or no axial muscle activity given that
the body does not undulate. Therefore, entraining is a potentially less
energetically costly behavior than Kármán gaiting. Why then, do
trout not choose to entrain all the time, for instance during light
treatments? One possible reason is that entraining may be potentially less
costly to perform but the penalty for losing position is greater than that for
Kármán gaiting in a vortex street. Although this may not occur
in the controlled conditions of the laboratory, flows in nature are invariably
unpredictable and span orders of magnitude. Upon being displaced from the
`entraining' region into the fast surrounding flow outside of the cylinder
wake, trout quickly respond by accelerating upstream to reestablish position.
This burst of swimming would certainly involve red, and potentially white,
axial muscle activity along the entire body.
Entraining fish with an intact lateral line voluntarily alternate between left and right sides of the cylinder (Fig. 9), which may prevent fatigue on one side of the body, given the asymmetrical posture of entraining fish relative to the downstream flow axis. By contrast, entraining fish with a blocked lateral line tend to have fidelity to one side of the cylinder and do not tend to switch from one side to the other. This could reflect the ability of the lateral line to promote the exploration of the hydrodynamic environment. Fish with an intact lateral line may be searching for a globally favorable flow environment, whereas fish with a blocked lateral line must settle for a locally favorable environment. This hypothesis assumes that volitionally alternating position between the two sides of the cylinder (e.g. transitioning across the suction region) is less costly than being displaced downstream from the `entraining' region.
Interestingly, fish displaced from entraining were rarely observed to
transition to the Kármán gait. In contrast to entraining,
Kármán gaiting may be less energetically costly to resume if the
fish becomes displaced. Behavioral evidence supports this hypothesis.
Kármán gaiting fish commonly leave the vortex street to
intercept food only to immediately return to the same position. Since fish
move largely passively with the lateral component of the oscillatory flow in a
vortex street (Liao, 2004),
resuming the Kármán gait would not require the sequential muscle
contraction seen in propulsive, undulatory swimming. Rather, minimal red
muscle activity may be needed to resume synchronization with the vortices,
since the low-pressure vortices will inherently draw fish in. When
Kármán gaiting fish drift too far downstream in the vortex
street, they briefly switch to propulsive undulation to reestablish position
in the vortex street. If fish play off vortices to resume position the
metabolic investment may not be as large as during whole-body undulation
during propulsive swimming in uniform flow, when no energy can be extracted
from the environment (Beal et al.,
2006). This is the case when entraining fish are displaced. If one
does not assume that the penalty for displacement is higher for entraining
than for Kármán gaiting and that energy savings was at a
premium, one might expect that entraining, which requires no body undulation,
might be the dominant behavior in all treatments. The fact that it is not
suggests that factors beyond the physiology and mechanics of locomotion
influence habitat selection. Measuring muscle activity and oxygen consumption
would provide a basis to compare the energy savings entraining confers, if
any, over Kármán gaiting or maintaining position in the bow wake
in front of a cylinder (Liao et al.,
2003b). Regardless of whether fish are Kármán
gaiting or entraining, it is clear that in this study fish preferred to
associate with vortical flows rather than uniform flow.
Future experiments may show that Kármán gaiting requires a
larger energetic investment than entraining, based on the dramatic differences
in body motions. Why then would fish prefer to Kármán gait
rather than entrain in the light? One explanation could be that the decision
to Kármán gait is related to feeding motivation. Trout are
visual feeders that have been observed to intercept food readily while
Kármán gaiting (Liao et al.,
2003b). In the field, many fish swim and feed in turbulent flows
more actively during the day than at night
(Heggenes, 1988;
Pavlov et al., 2000). Hungry
fish have been documented to seek out turbulent flows whereas satiated fish
prefer less complex flows (Pavlov et al.,
2000), perhaps because turbulence can increase prey encounter
rates (Lewis and Pedley, 2001;
MacKenzie and Kiorboe, 1995)
and enhance the success of these encounters by disorienting prey. The size of
vortices required to promote Kármán gaiting are large enough to
disorient favored prey such as small invertebrates, thus conveniently creating
a foraging opportunity while facilitating reduced muscular activity
(Liao, 2004). In addition, the
side-to-side motion of the Kármán gait facilitates the ability
to survey the environment and expands the range for prey detection and
capture. Unless prey drifts directly towards an entraining fish, the cost to
intercept it may be too high to warrant leaving the cylinder. The feeding
hypothesis also explains why some trout Kármán gait while others
do not (Fig. 6C,
Fig. 8C). This hypothesis could
be tested in future experiments by controlling for feeding motivation, which
should lead to predictable outcomes of where fish position themselves around a
cylinder in flow.
The results of this study offer insight into the contribution of the lateral line and vision to both the kinematics and hydrodynamic preference of freely swimming fish in the turbulent wake of a bluff body in flow. Both Kármán gaiting and entraining illustrate the ability to exploit vortical flows to hold station relative to the earth frame of reference rather than rely on active body undulation to generate thrust. In the light, Kármán gaiting is favored over entraining despite a potentially larger energetic cost. This suggests a general principle that is applicable to organisms moving freely in complex environments; control and physiological state, rather than energetic savings, can play a deciding role in habitat selection. The results of this paper provide quantitative progress towards an organismal understanding of sensorimotor control in turbulent environments.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
References |
|---|
|
TOPSummaryIntroductionMaterials and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Baker, C. F. and Montgomery, J. (1999). The sensory basis of rheotaxis in the blind Mexican cavefish, Astyanax fasciatus. J. Comp. Physiol. A 184,519 -527.[CrossRef]
Beal, D. N., Hover, F. S., Triantafyllou, M. S., Liao, J. C. and Lauder, G. V. (2006). Passive propulsion in vortex wakes. J. Fluid Mech. 549,385 -402.[CrossRef]
Bell, C. C. (2001). Memory-based expectations in electrosensory systems. Curr. Opin. Neurol. 11,481 -487.
Blaxter, H. S. and Fuiman, L. A. (1989). Function of the free neuromasts of marine teleost larvae. In The Mechanosensory Lateral Line: Neurobiology and Evolution (ed. S. Coombs, P. Gorner and H. Munz). New York: Springer.
Bose, N. and Lien, J. (1990). Energy absorption from ocean waves: a free ride for cetaceans. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 240,591 -605.[Medline]
Breder, C. M. (1965). Vortices and fish schools. Zoologica 50,97 -114.
Chagnaud, B. P., Bleckmann, H. and Engelmann, J.
(2006). Neural responses of goldfish lateral line afferents to
vortex motions. J. Exp. Biol.
209,327
-342.
Conley, R. A. and Coombs, S. (1998). Dipole source localization by mottled sculpin. III. Orientation after site-specific, unilateral denervation of the lateral line system. J. Comp. Physiol. A 183,335 -344.[CrossRef][Medline]
Coombs, S., Gorner, P. and Munz, H. (1989). The Mechanosensory Lateral Line: Neurobiology and Evolution. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Coombs, S., Braun, C. B. and Donovan, B. (2001). The orienting response of Lake Michigan mottled sculpin is mediated by canal neuromasts. J. Exp. Biol. 204,337 -348.[Abstract]
Dijkgraaf, S. (1963). The functioning and significance of the lateral-line organs. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 38,51 -105.[Medline]
Dijkgraaf, S. (1973). A method for complete and selective surgical elimination of the lateral line system in the codfish, Gadus morhua. Experientia 29,737 -738.[CrossRef][Medline]
Douglas, R. H., Bowmaker, J. K. and Kunz-Ramsay, Y. W. (1989). Ultraviolet vision in fish. In Seeing Contour and Colour (ed. J. J. Kulikowski, C. M. Dickinson and I. J. Murray), pp. 601-616. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Enders, E. C., Boisclair, D. and Roy, A. G. (2003). The effect of turbulence on the cost of swimming for juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 60,1149 -1160.[CrossRef]
Engelmann, J., Hanke, W., Mogdans, J. and Bleckmann, H. (2000). Hydrodynamic stimuli and the fish lateral line. Nature 408,51 -52.[CrossRef][Medline]
Engelmann, J., Hanke, W. and Bleckmann, H. (2002). Lateral line reception in still- and running water. J. Comp. Physiol. A 188,513 -526.[CrossRef][Medline]
Engelmann, J., Krother, S., Bleckmann, H. and Mogdans, J. (2003). Effects of running water on lateral line responses to moving objects. Brain Behav. Evol. 61,195 -212.[CrossRef][Medline]
Etkin, B., Korbacher, G. K. and Keefe, R. T. (1957). Acoustic radiation from a stationary cylinder in a fluid stream (Aeolian tones). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 29, 30-36.[CrossRef]
Fausch, K. D. (1993). Experimental analysis of microhabitat selection by juvenile steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and coho salmon (O. kisutch) in a British Columbia stream. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 50,1198 -1207.
Fernald, R. D. and Wright, S. E. (1985). Growth of the visual system in the African cichlid fish, Haplochromis burtoni.Vision Res. 25,163 -170.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gerstner, C. L. (1998). Use of substratum ripples for flow refuging by Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua. Environ.Biol. Fishes 51,455 -460.[CrossRef]
Grillner, S. (1985). Neurological bases of
rhythmic motor acts in vertebrates. Science
228,143
-149.
Hawryshyn, C. W. and Harosi, F. I. (1994). Spectral characteristics of visual pigments in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Vision Res. 34,1385 -1392.[CrossRef][Medline]
Heggenes, J. (1988). Effects of short-term flow fluctuations on displacement of, and habitat use by, brown trout in a small stream. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 117,336 -344.[CrossRef]
Heggenes, J. (2002). Flexible summer habitat selection by wild, allopatric brown trout in lotic environments. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 131,287 -298.[CrossRef]
Hinch, S. G. and Rand, P. S. (2000). Optimal swimming speeds and forward-assisted propulsion: energy-conserving behaviours if upriver-migrating adult salmon. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57,2470 -2478.[CrossRef]
Hobson, E. S., McFarland, W. N. and Chess, J. R. (1981). Crepuscular and nocturnal activities of Californian nearshore fishes, with consideration of their scotopic visual pigments and the photic environment. Fish. Bull. 79, 1-30.
Ingle, D. (1971). Vision: the experimental analysis of visual behavior. In Fish Physiology: Sensory Systems and Electric Organs. Vol. 5 (ed. W. S. Hoar and D. J. Randall), pp. 347. New York: Academic Press.
Janssen, J. (2000). Toxicity of Co2+: implications for lateral line studies. J. Comp. Physiol. A 186,957 -960.[CrossRef][Medline]
Janssen, J. and Corcoran, J. (1993). Lateral line stimuli can override vision to determine sunfish strike trajectory. J. Exp. Biol. 176,299 -305.[Medline]
Kanter, M. J. and Coombs, S. (2002). Rheotaxis and prey detection in uniform currents by Lake Michigan mottled sculpin (Cottus bairdi). J. Exp. Biol. 206, 59-70.
Karlsen, H. E. and Sand, O. (1987). Selective
and reversible blocking of the lateral line in freshwater fish. J.
Exp. Biol. 133,249
-262.
Lewis, D. M. and Pedley, T. J. (2001). The influence of turbulence on plankton predation strategies. J. Theor. Biol. 210,347 -365.[CrossRef][Medline]
Liao, J. C. (2004). Neuromuscular control of
trout swimming in a vortex street: implications for energy economy during the
Karman gait. J. Exp. Biol.
207,3495
-3506.
Liao, J. C., Beal, D. N., Lauder, G. V. and Triantafyllou, M.
S. (2003a). Fish exploiting vortices decrease muscle
activity. Science 302,1566
-1569.
Liao, J. C., Beal, D. N., Lauder, G. V. and Triantafyllou, M.
S. (2003b). The Kármán gait; novel kinematics
of rainbow trout swimming in a vortex street. J. Exp.
Biol. 206,1059
-1073.
MacKenzie, B. R. and Kiorboe, T. (1995). Encounter rates and swimming behavior of pause-travel and cruise larval fish predators in calm and turbulent laboratory environments. Limnol. Oceanogr. 40,1278 -1289.
Masino, M. A. and Fetcho, J. R. (2005). Fictive
swimming motor patterns in wild type and mutant larval zebrafish.
J. Neurophysiol. 93,3177
-3188.
McLaughlin, R. L. and Noakes, D. L. G. (1998). Going against the flow: an examination of the propulsive movements made by young brook trout in streams. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55,853 -860.[CrossRef]
Mogdans, J. and Bleckmann, H. (1998). Responses of the goldfish trunk lateral line to moving objects. J. Comp. Physiol. A 182,659 -676.[CrossRef]
Montgomery, J. and Coombs, S. (1998).
Peripheral encoding of moving sources by the lateral line system of a
sit-and-wait predator. J. Exp. Biol.
201,91
-102.
Montgomery, J., Baker, C. and Carton, A. (1997). The lateral line can mediate rheotaxis in fish. Nature 389,960 -963.[CrossRef]
Montgomery, J. C., McDonald, F., Baker, C. F., Carton, A. G. and Ling, N. (2003). Sensory integration in the hydrodynamic world of rainbow trout. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 270,S195 -S197.
Nauen, J. C. and Lauder, G. V. (2002).
Quantification of the wake of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
using three-dimensional stereoscopic digital particle image velocimetry.
J. Exp. Biol. 205,3271
-3279.
New, J. G. and Bodznick, D. (1990). Medullary electrosensory processing in the little skate. II. Suppression of self-generated electrosensory interference during respiration. J. Comp. Physiol. A 167,295 -307.[Medline]
Partridge, B. L. and Pitcher, T. J. (1980). The sensory basis of fish schools: relative roles of the lateral line and vision. J. Comp. Physiol. 135,315 -325.[CrossRef]
Pavlov, D. S., Lupandin, A. I. and Skorobogatov, M. A. (2000). The effects of flow turbulence on the behavior and distribution of fish. J. Ichthyol. 40,S232 -S261.
Pitcher, T. J., Partridge, B. L. and Wardle, C. S.
(1976). A blind fish can school. Science
194,963
-965.
Rice, W. R. (1989). Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43,223 -225.[CrossRef]
Roeser, T. and Baier, H. (2003). Visuomotor
behaviors in larval zebrafish after GFP-guided laser ablation of the optic
tectum. J. Neurosci. 23,3726
-3734.
Sillar, K. T. and Roberts, A. (1988). A neuronal mechanism for sensory gating during locomotion in a vertebrate. Nature 331,262 -265.[CrossRef][Medline]
Soffe, S. R. (1993). Two distinct rhymthmic motor patterns are driven by common premotor and motor neurons in a simple vertebrate spinal cord. J. Neurosci. 13,4456 -4469.[Abstract]
Streitlien, K. and Triantafyllou, G. S. (1996). Efficient foil propulsion through vortex control. AIAA J. 34,2315 -2319.
Sutterlin, A. M. and Waddy, S. (1975). Possible role of the posterior lateral line in obstacle entrainment by brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 32,2441 -2446.
Vogel, D. and Bleckmann, H. (2000). Behavioral discrimination of water motions caused by moving objects. J. Comp. Physiol. A 186,1107 -1117.[Medline]
Webb, P. W. (1993). The effect of solid and porous channel walls on steady swimming of steelhead trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. J. Exp. Biol. 178,97 -108.[Abstract]
Webb, P. W. (1998). Entrainment by river chub Nocomis micropogon and smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu on cylinders. J. Exp. Biol. 201,2403 -2412.[Abstract]
Webb, P. W. (2004). Response latencies to
postural differences in three species of teleostean fishes. J. Exp.
Biol. 207,955
-961.
Weihs, D. (1973). Hydromechanics of fish schooling. Nature 241,290 -291.[CrossRef]
Wu, T. Y. and Chwang, A. T. (1975). Extraction of Flow Energy by Fish and Birds in a Wavy Stream. New York: Plenum Press.
Zdravkovich, M. M. (1997). Flow Around Circular Cylinders: A Comprehensive Guide Through Flow Phenomena, Experiments, Applications, Mathematical Models, and Computer Simulations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. C Liao A review of fish swimming mechanics and behaviour in altered flows Phil Trans R Soc B, November 29, 2007; 362(1487): 1973 - 1993. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
