DOI: 10.5061/dryad.kkwh70s9b
title: Data for: Bi-modal response strategy in Daphnia to ambush predation risk

description: Predation, a well-established major selective force, can manifest through
 either consumptive or non-consumptive effects. The relative impact of such
 effects is predicted to vary depending on the predator hunting strategy.
 In aquatic systems, great attention has been paid to coursing predators,
 such as fish, and their effects on the behaviour of zooplankton. However,
 less information is available regarding more ambush-style predators. To
 remedy this paucity, we utilised a 3D-tracking platform to record groups
 of Daphnia magna under control or predation risk conditions from the
 ambush, invertebrate predator Erythromma najas. This design allowed us to
 test if there are anti-predator responses in multiple metrics of swimming
 behaviours. Furthermore, we recorded actual predation events allowing the
 distinction between predator exuded info-chemicals and those produced
 during the predation event. We demonstrate that predation risk was
 greatest for those that swam at 85% of the available depth and averaged
 8.1 mm/s. Examining each individuals swimming behaviour separately shows
 that predation risk did not exert an impact on any of the prey response
 metrics. Interestingly, however, we show that Daphnia conform to one of
 two strategies whilst under predation risk; either swim fast high up in
 the water column or swim slowly close to the bottom. Hence, this
 dichotomous behaviour is driven by strategies combining speed and depth in
 different constellations. As a result, our study demonstrates that Daphnia
 can detect the presence of a predator, but not immediately the act of
 predation. In a broader context, our findings highlight the importance of
 considering both the spatial and temporal dimensions of predation events
 in order correctly detect anti-predator responses. The data here is the
 raw positions of each individual tracked for the above study.
description: The information on collection of data is found in the associated
 manuscript and the only processing in is the concatenation of individual
 files into a single dataset, included here.
description: The data file is .cs so may be opend and read by many different
 applications depending on the users preference.
description: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Title of Dataset: Data supporting 'Bi-modal
 response strategy in *Daphnia* to ambush predation risk' 2. Author
 Information A. Principal Investigator Contact Information Name: Marcus Lee
 Institution: Lund University Address: Ekologihuset, Slvegatan 37, 223 62,
 Lund, Sweden Email: marcus.lee@biol.lu.se B. Associate or Co-investigator
 Contact Information Name: Lars-Anders Hansson Institution: Lund University
 Address: Ekologihuset, Slvegatan 37, 223 62, Lund, Sweden Email:
 lars-anders.hansson@biol.lu.se 3. Date of data collection: 2023/03 -
 2023/05 4. Geographic location of data collection: Lund, Sweden 5.
 Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the
 data: Swedish Research Council (VR), Award: 2016-03552 SHARING/ACCESS
 INFORMATION 1. Recommended citation for this dataset: Lee, Marcus and
 Hansson, Lars-Anders (2023), Data supporting: Bi-modal response strategy
 in *Daphnia* to ambush predation risk, Dryad, Dataset, https://doi.org/
 DATA & FILE OVERVIEW 1. File List: A. predation\_data.csv i. Raw
 data of the recorded positions of each individual over five minutes,
 collated into a single file. 2. Relationship between files, if important:
 N/A 3. Additional related data collected that was not included in the
 current data package: This data set was collated from the raw data files
 produced after each recording. These raw files are not included, however
 the data represented in the predation\_data.csv is simply copied into a
 single file for each of use 4. Are there multiple versions of the dataset?
 No METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION 1. Description of methods used for
 collection/generation of data: For the description of the data generation
 please see the associated manuscript (Bi-modal response strategy in
 *Daphnia* to ambush predation risk) 2. Methods for processing the data:
 All recordings automatically produced an excel directly and saved. To
 prevent the accidental overwriting of data, each file was read into R
 studio and saved into a single new file (predation\_data.csv). This file
 was then used to create the figures and conduct analyses using R Studio.
 For further information regarding the collection and generation of the
 dataset see the associated manuscript (Bi-modal response strategy in
 *Daphnia* to ambush predation risk) 3. Instrument- or software-specific
 information needed to interpret the data: N/A 4. Standards and calibration
 information, if appropriate: N/A 5. Environmental/experimental conditions:
 For further information regarding the collection and generation of the
 dataset see the associated manuscript (Bi-modal response strategy in
 *Daphnia* to ambush predation risk) 6. Describe any quality-assurance
 procedures performed on the data: All data was inspected manually and
 cross-referenced between digital and physical records. 7. People involved
 with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission: Marcus Lee
 DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: predation\_data.csv 1. Number of variables:
 24 2. Number of cases/rows: 93601 3. Variable List: Key = A. Variable name
 a. Description i. Unit 1\. Value labels a. Missing value code ``` A. ID a.
 A unique file name that contains the treatment and individual information.
 i. 1. Con_H_D_11_N 2. Con_H_D_12_N 3. Con_H_D_13_N 4. Con_H_D_14_N 5.
 Con_H_D_15_N 6. Dams_A_D_26_N 7. Dams_A_D_27_N 8. Dams_A_D_28_N 9.
 Dams_A_D_29_N 10. Dams_A_D_30_Y 11. Dams_A_P_31_N 12. Con_J_D_16_N 13.
 Con_J_D_17_N 14. Con_J_D_18_N 15. Con_J_D_19_N 16. Con_J_D_20_N 17.
 Dams_C_D_38_N 18. Dams_C_D_39_Y 19. Dams_C_D_40_N 20. Dams_C_D_42_N 21.
 Dams_C_P_43_N 22. Con_L_D_21_N 23. Con_L_D_22_N 24. Con_L_D_23_N 25.
 Con_L_D_24_N 26. Dams_B_D_32_N 27. Dams_B_D_33_N 28. Dams_B_D_34_N 29.
 Dams_B_D_35_Y 30. Dams_B_P_37_N 31. Dams_F_D_44_N 32. Dams_F_D_45_N 33.
 Dams_F_D_46_Y 34. Dams_F_D_47_N 35. Dams_F_D_48_N 36. Dams_F_P_49_N 37.
 Con_E_D_10_N 38. Con_E_D_6_N 39. Con_E_D_7_N 40. Con_E_D_8_N 41.
 Con_E_D_9_N 42. Dams_G_D_50_N 43. Dams_G_D_51_N 44. Dams_G_D_52_N 45.
 Dams_G_D_53_N 46. Dams_G_D_54_Y 47. Dams_G_P_55_N 48. Con_D_D_1_N 49.
 Con_D_D_2_N 50. Con_D_D_3_N 51. Con_D_D_4_N 52. Con_D_D_5_N a. B.
 Treatment a. A factor depending on which treatment this individual was
 exposed to; either Control or Predation risk (Con and Dams respectively).
 i. 1. Con 2. Dams a. C. Recording a. Each recording has a unique
 identifier and refers to a group of Daphnia that were all recorded
 simultaneously. i. 1. H 2. A 3. J 4. C 5. L 6. B 7. F 8. E 9. G 10. D a.
 D. Species a. An identifier as to whether the focal individual was a
 Daphnia (D) or the Predator (P) in this case it was a damselfly. i. 1. D
 2. P a. E. Individual a. A unique number identifier for each individual.
 i. 1. 11 2. 12 3. 13 4. 14 5. 15 6. 26 7. 27 8. 28 9. 29 10. 30 11. 31 12.
 16 13. 17 14. 18 15. 19 16. 20 17. 38 18. 39 19. 40 20. 42 21. 43 22. 21
 23. 22 24. 23 25. 24 26. 32 27. 33 28. 34 29. 35 30. 37 31. 44 32. 45 33.
 46 34. 47 35. 48 36. 49 37. 10 38. 6 39. 7 40. 8 41. 9 42. 50 43. 51 44.
 52 45. 53 46. 54 47. 55 48. 1 49. 2 50. 3 51. 4 52. 5 a. F. Predated a. A
 factorial designation as to whether the focal individual was eaten during
 the recording. Y = eaten, N = survived. i. 1. Y 2. N a. G. Track a. A
 redundant identifier produced during the conversion from recording to .csv
 file i. 1. 1 a. H. Frame a. The position in the recording. Recordings were
 conducted at 6 fps for five minutes. i. 1. 1 : 1800 a. I. Time a. Time
 based on dividing the frame by 6 i. Seconds 1. Numerical a. J. X a.
 Position in the X plane i. mm 1. Numerical a. NA (No data) K. Z a.
 Position in the Z plane i. mm 1. Numerical a. NA (No data) L. Y a.
 Position in the Y plane i. mm 1. Numerical a. NA (No data) M. R a. Value
 of redness based on the RGB colour scale i. 1. 0 : 255 a. NA (No data) N.
 G a. Value of greeness based on the RGB colour scale i. 1. 0 : 255 a. NA
 (No data) O. B a. Value of blueness based on the RGB colour scale i. 1. 0
 : 255 a.NA (No data) P. QDot a. Colour of the nanoparticles used as
 distinction between predators and prey, based on R, G and B values i. 1.
 yellow 2. red a. Q. speed a. The speed of each individual between each
 frame i. mm/s 1. Numerical a. NA R. Distance_a a. The average distance of
 each individual from individual a in this recording. Note that individual
 a is only an identifier for cross recording comparisons and any individual
 could have been individual a i. mm 1. Numerical a. NA S. Distance_b a. The
 average distance of each individual from individual b in this recording.
 Note that individual b is only an identifier for cross recording
 comparisons and any individual could have been individual b i. mm 1.
 Numerical a. NA T. Distance_c a. The average distance of each individual
 from individual c in this recording. Note that individual c is only an
 identifier for cross recording comparisons and any individual could have
 been individual c i. mm 1. Numerical a. NA U. Distance_d a. The average
 distance of each individual from individual d in this recording. Note that
 individual d is only an identifier for cross recording comparisons and any
 individual could have been individual d i. mm 1. Numaerical a. NA V.
 Distance_e a. The average distance of each individual from individual e in
 this recording. Note that individual e is only an identifier for cross
 recording comparisons and any individual could have been individual e i.
 mm 1. Numerical a. NA W. Distance_f a. The average distance of each
 individual from the predator (if included in the recording) i. mm 1.
 Numerical a. NA X. pred.time a. The time (in number of frames) until the
 predation event occurred. i. 1. Numerical a. NA ```