Fig. 4

Examples of experimental scenarios in which ponds equipped with high-resolution acoustic telemetry system can serve as particularly useful empirical substrates (A) By releasing previously phenotyped fishing ponds with experimentally induced spatial variation in risk (e.g. caged predators) researchers can study to what extent individual prey phenotypes (behaviour, morphology, physiology) predict movement patterns and habitat choice of prey in a “landscape of fear”. (B) Whole-pond acoustic telemetry in combination with controlled environmental manipulations (e.g. water turbidity) allow for powerful comparison of continuous high-resolution individual-level data acquired pre/post-environmental-impact. (C) In ponds, researchers can also manipulate stocked individuals (e.g. via slow-release implants for manipulating contaminant exposures) and compare their movement patterns in relation to unmanipulated control individuals. By simultaneous tracking of such individuals through a change in ecological context (e.g. no predators (white section) versus caged predators (shaded section)) researchers can also unravel how the expression of key movement behaviours may depend on interactions between manipulations and ecological contexts. Finally, by the release of caged predators, the predation vulnerability of manipulated and control individuals can be directly assessed, to link behavioural effects to fitness (bars, right y-axis). (D) Fish-removal followed by re-stocking in ponds have several associated benefits and can for example allow researchers to immerse fish into a controlled predation-risk environment and link survival selection to an identifiable agent. Hence, one can expose fish to different kinds of predators (e.g. sit-and-wait predators (e.g. pike) versus active pursue foragers (e.g. perch) and ask if different types of predators generate similar or different patterns of correlations between key movement traits and viability