Table 3.

Comparison of Tritonia diomedea orientations to odour plumes, with and without rhinophores

RhinophoresOdourNθ (deg.)rF2,N-2P95% CL (deg.)
Present Prey 003 0.58 8.83 0.016 063, 304 
 Predator 171 0.70 5.03 0.052 ns 
 Predator* 171 0.90 420 <0.0001 142, 202 
 Control 119 0.30 1.08 0.40 ns 
Absent Prey 076 0.23 0.48 0.64 ns 
 Predator 177 0.14 0.16 0.85 ns 
 Control 042 0.26 0.38 0.70 ns 
RhinophoresOdourNθ (deg.)rF2,N-2P95% CL (deg.)
Present Prey 003 0.58 8.83 0.016 063, 304 
 Predator 171 0.70 5.03 0.052 ns 
 Predator* 171 0.90 420 <0.0001 142, 202 
 Control 119 0.30 1.08 0.40 ns 
Absent Prey 076 0.23 0.48 0.64 ns 
 Predator 177 0.14 0.16 0.85 ns 
 Control 042 0.26 0.38 0.70 ns 

Hotelling tests of 2nd order mean headings relative to flow (θ, r; 0°=upstream) were used to assess the significance of mean slug orientations over the 2 min interval, 30 s after encountering a prey, predator or control odour plume in the flow tank. CL, 95% confidence limits for sample means significant at P=0.05; ns, not significant.

Two sets of values are presented for orientation relative to predator odour, the first is the complete dataset, the second (*) does not include a single exceptional animal (see text). ns, not significant.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal