Predators Can Stress Prey to Death

Safe dragonfly larvae that could sense the presence of their predators had a higher mortality rate than unstressed larvae. Christopher Intagliata reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


A hungry fish can kill prey with a quick bite. That is, of course, if its prey hasn't already died of fright. Take tasty dragonflies. The mere presence of predators—even caged ones—is enough to scare dragonflies to death, according to a study in the journal Ecology. [Shannon J. McCauley, Locke Rowe, and Marie-Josée Fortin, "The deadly effects of ‘nonlethal’ predators"]

Researchers collected wild dragonfly larvae, and placed them in tanks with fish or insect predators. The larvae could see and smell their hunters—but were kept safe by underwater cages. After two months, the researchers took a head count—and found that dragonfly larvae sharing quarters with their killers were two to four times as likely to die off, compared to counterparts living in predator-free waters. And they had slimmer chances of surviving metamorphosis, too.

The authors suggest a couple reasons why. First, prey tend to make fewer forays for snacks when predators are lurking around, so they may not be as nutritionally fit. And previous studies have shown that the presence of predators ups stress levels in prey, weakening their immune systems and making them more vulnerable to disease—and death.

As if being eaten wasn't enough to worry about, looks can kill too.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe