Nutritional missed opportunity costs: wild house mice (Mus musculus) consistently consume less preferred food, with implications for control.
IF 3.8
1区 农林科学
Q1 AGRONOMY
Finn C G Parker,Catherine J Price,Jenna P Bytheway,Peter B Banks
求助PDF
{"title":"Nutritional missed opportunity costs: wild house mice (Mus musculus) consistently consume less preferred food, with implications for control.","authors":"Finn C G Parker,Catherine J Price,Jenna P Bytheway,Peter B Banks","doi":"10.1002/ps.70229","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nForaging animals must navigate trade-offs among foods of varying quality and accessibility, with preferences generally predicted to be driven by energy maximisation. Limited access to preferred resources increases missed opportunity costs (MOCs), which should necessitate uptake of less-preferred alternatives. How animals trade off access to preferred versus less-preferred foods has important implications for wildlife management, especially where anthropogenic, natural, and management-related food sources co-occur. In cropping systems, mouse control relies on their uptake of unpalatable poisons coated on wheat grains, even when high-quality alternatives like sown and spilled grain are available. We tested whether increasing the cost of accessing preferred wheat seeds would shift mice toward consuming a less-preferred food, lentils.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nWe conducted two experiments manipulating the costs of searching for wheat, predicting mice would compensate by eating more lentils. Unexpectedly, mice ate similar quantities of lentils across treatments, regardless of wheat accessibility. We suggest this occurred because lentils contain substantially more protein than wheat, leading to a nutritional MOC associated with wheat - that is, a fitness cost incurred from an imbalanced, wheat-only diet.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nMOCs are rarely defined and are typically framed as time or energy trade-offs, yet animals also incur fitness costs from nutritional imbalance. Bait substrates usually target pest preferences, but uptake may be limited when substrates match the macronutrient composition of background food (e.g., crops). We suggest that bait uptake could be improved by considering nutritional MOCs and selecting substrates that complement the macronutrient composition of background alternatives, thereby exploiting animals' nutritional requirements. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.","PeriodicalId":218,"journal":{"name":"Pest Management Science","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pest Management Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.70229","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
引用
批量引用
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Foraging animals must navigate trade-offs among foods of varying quality and accessibility, with preferences generally predicted to be driven by energy maximisation. Limited access to preferred resources increases missed opportunity costs (MOCs), which should necessitate uptake of less-preferred alternatives. How animals trade off access to preferred versus less-preferred foods has important implications for wildlife management, especially where anthropogenic, natural, and management-related food sources co-occur. In cropping systems, mouse control relies on their uptake of unpalatable poisons coated on wheat grains, even when high-quality alternatives like sown and spilled grain are available. We tested whether increasing the cost of accessing preferred wheat seeds would shift mice toward consuming a less-preferred food, lentils.
RESULTS
We conducted two experiments manipulating the costs of searching for wheat, predicting mice would compensate by eating more lentils. Unexpectedly, mice ate similar quantities of lentils across treatments, regardless of wheat accessibility. We suggest this occurred because lentils contain substantially more protein than wheat, leading to a nutritional MOC associated with wheat - that is, a fitness cost incurred from an imbalanced, wheat-only diet.
CONCLUSION
MOCs are rarely defined and are typically framed as time or energy trade-offs, yet animals also incur fitness costs from nutritional imbalance. Bait substrates usually target pest preferences, but uptake may be limited when substrates match the macronutrient composition of background food (e.g., crops). We suggest that bait uptake could be improved by considering nutritional MOCs and selecting substrates that complement the macronutrient composition of background alternatives, thereby exploiting animals' nutritional requirements. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
营养错失的机会成本:野生家鼠(小家鼠)一直消耗较少的首选食物,这意味着控制。
觅食动物必须在不同质量和可获得性的食物之间进行权衡,通常预测它们的偏好是由能量最大化驱动的。获得首选资源的机会有限,增加了错失的机会成本(moc),这就需要采用不那么首选的替代方案。动物如何权衡获得首选食物和不太喜欢的食物对野生动物管理具有重要意义,特别是在人为、自然和管理相关食物来源共同发生的情况下。在种植系统中,老鼠的控制依赖于它们对涂在麦粒上的难吃毒素的吸收,即使有高质量的替代品,如播种和洒出的谷物。我们测试了增加获取喜欢的小麦种子的成本是否会使老鼠转向不太喜欢的食物——扁豆。结果:我们进行了两个实验,操纵寻找小麦的成本,预测老鼠会通过吃更多的扁豆来补偿。出乎意料的是,老鼠在不同的处理中吃了相似数量的小扁豆,而不管小麦的可及性。我们认为,这是因为小扁豆比小麦含有更多的蛋白质,导致与小麦相关的营养MOC——也就是说,不平衡的、只吃小麦的饮食造成了健康成本。结论moc很少被定义,通常被框定为时间或能量的权衡,然而动物也会因营养失衡而产生健康成本。诱饵底物通常针对害虫偏好,但当底物与背景食物(如作物)的常量营养素组成相匹配时,吸收可能受到限制。我们建议通过考虑营养moc和选择补充背景替代品宏量营养素组成的底物,从而利用动物的营养需求来提高饵料的吸收。©2025作者。由John Wiley & Sons Ltd代表化学工业协会出版的《害虫管理科学》。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。