The effect of novel and familiar predator cues on prey vigilance and foraging behaviors in the greater khingan mountains, Inner Mongolia, China
(2019) In Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 17(4). p.8219-8234- Abstract
During periods of predation risk, prey adopt antipredator behaviours to maximise chances of survival, such as increased vigilance, reduced foraging time, shifting to safe habitat, and group formation. To effectively balance resource acquisition and antipredator behavior, prey animals make use of cues within their environment that provide them accurate information about the realistic threat of predation. Using camera traps, we tested vigilance and feeding behavioural responses of two naturally occurring ungulate species roe deer and moose to cues from naturally occurring brown bear and novel Amur tiger predators. We found that roe deer and moose vigilance and feeding behaviours were not affected by either visual or olfactory cues from... (More)
During periods of predation risk, prey adopt antipredator behaviours to maximise chances of survival, such as increased vigilance, reduced foraging time, shifting to safe habitat, and group formation. To effectively balance resource acquisition and antipredator behavior, prey animals make use of cues within their environment that provide them accurate information about the realistic threat of predation. Using camera traps, we tested vigilance and feeding behavioural responses of two naturally occurring ungulate species roe deer and moose to cues from naturally occurring brown bear and novel Amur tiger predators. We found that roe deer and moose vigilance and feeding behaviours were not affected by either visual or olfactory cues from predators, suggesting that ungulates in this system do not respond differently to novel predator cues. There are a number of potential explanations for this surprising lack of response to any predator cues: a) habituation to uninformative cues is important; b) ungulates might have relied more heavily on other cue types, such as auditory cues, or cues in combination; and, c) constraints on dispersal and/or resources may result in prey being forced to remain in high risk food patches, and continued prioritization of feeding over vigilance. We therefore, recommend that in the future studies regarding cues should involve a combination of cues at a similar location to increase predation risk to the animals to maximise prey response. To our knowledge, this is the first study to lay out the foundation of the ecological influences of captive Amur tiger on prey behaviors in the wild environment.
(Less)
- author
- Mpemba, H. ; Fan, Y. ; Macleod, K. J. LU ; Wen, D. and Jiang, G.
- organization
- publishing date
- 2019
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Antipredator, Camera trap, Fear ecology, Foraging, Hanma, Predators, Ungulates, Vigilance
- in
- Applied Ecology and Environmental Research
- volume
- 17
- issue
- 4
- pages
- 16 pages
- publisher
- Corvinus University of Budapest
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85070466694
- ISSN
- 1589-1623
- DOI
- 10.15666/aeer/1704_82198234
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 0175b719-84c1-4ac2-9a83-837390f1ad43
- date added to LUP
- 2019-08-26 13:50:21
- date last changed
- 2022-04-18 17:05:41
@article{0175b719-84c1-4ac2-9a83-837390f1ad43,
abstract = {{<p>During periods of predation risk, prey adopt antipredator behaviours to maximise chances of survival, such as increased vigilance, reduced foraging time, shifting to safe habitat, and group formation. To effectively balance resource acquisition and antipredator behavior, prey animals make use of cues within their environment that provide them accurate information about the realistic threat of predation. Using camera traps, we tested vigilance and feeding behavioural responses of two naturally occurring ungulate species roe deer and moose to cues from naturally occurring brown bear and novel Amur tiger predators. We found that roe deer and moose vigilance and feeding behaviours were not affected by either visual or olfactory cues from predators, suggesting that ungulates in this system do not respond differently to novel predator cues. There are a number of potential explanations for this surprising lack of response to any predator cues: a) habituation to uninformative cues is important; b) ungulates might have relied more heavily on other cue types, such as auditory cues, or cues in combination; and, c) constraints on dispersal and/or resources may result in prey being forced to remain in high risk food patches, and continued prioritization of feeding over vigilance. We therefore, recommend that in the future studies regarding cues should involve a combination of cues at a similar location to increase predation risk to the animals to maximise prey response. To our knowledge, this is the first study to lay out the foundation of the ecological influences of captive Amur tiger on prey behaviors in the wild environment.</p>}},
author = {{Mpemba, H. and Fan, Y. and Macleod, K. J. and Wen, D. and Jiang, G.}},
issn = {{1589-1623}},
keywords = {{Antipredator; Camera trap; Fear ecology; Foraging; Hanma; Predators; Ungulates; Vigilance}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{4}},
pages = {{8219--8234}},
publisher = {{Corvinus University of Budapest}},
series = {{Applied Ecology and Environmental Research}},
title = {{The effect of novel and familiar predator cues on prey vigilance and foraging behaviors in the greater khingan mountains, Inner Mongolia, China}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.15666/aeer/1704_82198234}},
doi = {{10.15666/aeer/1704_82198234}},
volume = {{17}},
year = {{2019}},
}