不对称的捕食强度会使主要猎物和次要猎物产生不同的反捕食行为。

IF 3.5 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Corbin C Kuntze, M Zachariah Peery, Jonathan N Pauli
{"title":"不对称的捕食强度会使主要猎物和次要猎物产生不同的反捕食行为。","authors":"Corbin C Kuntze, M Zachariah Peery, Jonathan N Pauli","doi":"10.1111/1365-2656.14166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is widely recognized that predators can influence prey through both direct consumption and by inducing costly antipredator behaviours, the latter of which can produce nonconsumptive effects that cascade through trophic systems. Yet, determining how particular prey manage risk in natural settings remains challenging as empirical studies disproportionately focus on single predator-prey dyads. Here, we contrast foraging strategies within the context of a primary and secondary prey to explore how antipredator behaviours emerge as a product of predation intensity as well as the setting in which an encounter takes place. We studied the effects of spotted owls (Strix occidentalis) on two species experiencing asymmetrical risk: dusky-footed woodrats (Neotoma fuscipes; primary prey) and deer mice (Peromyscus spp.; alternative prey). Woodrats are most abundant within young forests, but predominantly captured by owls foraging within mature forests; in contrast, deer mice occur in high densities across forest types and seral stages and are consumed at lower per-capita rates overall. We deployed experimental foraging patches within areas of high and low spotted owl activity, created artificial risky and safe refuge treatments, and monitored behaviour throughout the entirety of prey foraging bouts. Woodrats were more vigilant and foraged less within mature forests and at riskier patches, although the effect of refuge treatment was contingent upon forest type. In contrast, deer mice only demonstrated consistent behavioural responses to riskier refuge treatments; forest type had little effect on perceived risk or the relative importance of refuge treatment. Thus, habitat can interact with predator activity to structure antipredator responses differently for primary versus secondary prey. Our findings show that asymmetrical predation can modulate both the magnitude of perceived risk and the strategies used to manage it, thus highlighting an important and understudied contingency in risk effects research. Evaluating the direct and indirect effects of predation through the paradigm of primary and secondary prey may improve our understanding of how nonconsumptive effects can extend to population- and community-level responses.</p>","PeriodicalId":14934,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Animal Ecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Asymmetrical predation intensity produces divergent antipredator behaviours in primary and secondary prey.\",\"authors\":\"Corbin C Kuntze, M Zachariah Peery, Jonathan N Pauli\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1365-2656.14166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>It is widely recognized that predators can influence prey through both direct consumption and by inducing costly antipredator behaviours, the latter of which can produce nonconsumptive effects that cascade through trophic systems. Yet, determining how particular prey manage risk in natural settings remains challenging as empirical studies disproportionately focus on single predator-prey dyads. Here, we contrast foraging strategies within the context of a primary and secondary prey to explore how antipredator behaviours emerge as a product of predation intensity as well as the setting in which an encounter takes place. We studied the effects of spotted owls (Strix occidentalis) on two species experiencing asymmetrical risk: dusky-footed woodrats (Neotoma fuscipes; primary prey) and deer mice (Peromyscus spp.; alternative prey). Woodrats are most abundant within young forests, but predominantly captured by owls foraging within mature forests; in contrast, deer mice occur in high densities across forest types and seral stages and are consumed at lower per-capita rates overall. We deployed experimental foraging patches within areas of high and low spotted owl activity, created artificial risky and safe refuge treatments, and monitored behaviour throughout the entirety of prey foraging bouts. Woodrats were more vigilant and foraged less within mature forests and at riskier patches, although the effect of refuge treatment was contingent upon forest type. In contrast, deer mice only demonstrated consistent behavioural responses to riskier refuge treatments; forest type had little effect on perceived risk or the relative importance of refuge treatment. Thus, habitat can interact with predator activity to structure antipredator responses differently for primary versus secondary prey. Our findings show that asymmetrical predation can modulate both the magnitude of perceived risk and the strategies used to manage it, thus highlighting an important and understudied contingency in risk effects research. Evaluating the direct and indirect effects of predation through the paradigm of primary and secondary prey may improve our understanding of how nonconsumptive effects can extend to population- and community-level responses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Animal Ecology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Animal Ecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.14166\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Animal Ecology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.14166","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们普遍认为,捕食者可以通过直接消耗和诱导代价高昂的反捕食行为来影响猎物,后者可以产生非消耗性效应,并通过营养系统产生连锁反应。然而,确定特定猎物在自然环境中如何管理风险仍然具有挑战性,因为实证研究过多地关注单一捕食者-猎物二元组合。在这里,我们对比了主要猎物和次要猎物的觅食策略,以探索反捕食者行为是如何作为捕食强度和遭遇环境的产物而出现的。我们研究了斑纹猫头鹰(Strix occidentalis)对两种面临非对称风险的物种的影响:暗色脚木鼠(Neotoma fuscipes,主要猎物)和鹿鼠(Peromyscus spp.,替代猎物)。林鼠在幼林中数量最多,但主要被在成熟森林中觅食的猫头鹰捕获;相比之下,鹿鼠在不同森林类型和不同林龄阶段的密度都很高,但总体人均捕食率较低。我们在斑头鸺鹠活动频繁和活动较少的区域部署了觅食实验斑块,创建了人工风险和安全避难所处理,并在整个猎物觅食过程中对行为进行监测。在成熟森林和风险较高的斑鸮觅食区,木鼠的警惕性更高,觅食次数更少,但避难所处理的效果取决于森林类型。与此相反,鹿鼠只对风险较高的保护区表现出一致的行为反应;森林类型对感知风险或保护区处理的相对重要性几乎没有影响。因此,栖息地可以与捕食者的活动相互作用,对主要猎物和次要猎物产生不同的反捕食反应。我们的研究结果表明,非对称捕食既能调节感知风险的大小,也能调节用于管理风险的策略,从而突出了风险效应研究中一个重要而未被充分研究的偶然因素。通过主要猎物和次要猎物的范例来评估捕食的直接和间接影响,可以提高我们对非消耗性影响如何扩展到种群和群落水平反应的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Asymmetrical predation intensity produces divergent antipredator behaviours in primary and secondary prey.

It is widely recognized that predators can influence prey through both direct consumption and by inducing costly antipredator behaviours, the latter of which can produce nonconsumptive effects that cascade through trophic systems. Yet, determining how particular prey manage risk in natural settings remains challenging as empirical studies disproportionately focus on single predator-prey dyads. Here, we contrast foraging strategies within the context of a primary and secondary prey to explore how antipredator behaviours emerge as a product of predation intensity as well as the setting in which an encounter takes place. We studied the effects of spotted owls (Strix occidentalis) on two species experiencing asymmetrical risk: dusky-footed woodrats (Neotoma fuscipes; primary prey) and deer mice (Peromyscus spp.; alternative prey). Woodrats are most abundant within young forests, but predominantly captured by owls foraging within mature forests; in contrast, deer mice occur in high densities across forest types and seral stages and are consumed at lower per-capita rates overall. We deployed experimental foraging patches within areas of high and low spotted owl activity, created artificial risky and safe refuge treatments, and monitored behaviour throughout the entirety of prey foraging bouts. Woodrats were more vigilant and foraged less within mature forests and at riskier patches, although the effect of refuge treatment was contingent upon forest type. In contrast, deer mice only demonstrated consistent behavioural responses to riskier refuge treatments; forest type had little effect on perceived risk or the relative importance of refuge treatment. Thus, habitat can interact with predator activity to structure antipredator responses differently for primary versus secondary prey. Our findings show that asymmetrical predation can modulate both the magnitude of perceived risk and the strategies used to manage it, thus highlighting an important and understudied contingency in risk effects research. Evaluating the direct and indirect effects of predation through the paradigm of primary and secondary prey may improve our understanding of how nonconsumptive effects can extend to population- and community-level responses.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Animal Ecology
Journal of Animal Ecology 环境科学-动物学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
188
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Animal Ecology publishes the best original research on all aspects of animal ecology, ranging from the molecular to the ecosystem level. These may be field, laboratory and theoretical studies utilising terrestrial, freshwater or marine systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信