K. N. Denny, K. N. Bilodeau, C. A. Dumont, Z. H. Olson
{"title":"Separating effects of spatial location and microhabitat density on perceived predation risk in small mammals","authors":"K. N. Denny, K. N. Bilodeau, C. A. Dumont, Z. H. Olson","doi":"10.1007/s10211-021-00365-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Prey animals must balance the benefits of foraging in a particular area with their risk of predation in that area and often prioritize indirect cues to predation risk over direct cues of predators when making decisions about foraging under the risk of predation. Researchers using giving-up density (GUD) as a metric to assess perceived predation risk have found that it is affected by microhabitat, with certain animals willing to spend more time foraging (i.e., lower GUD) in relatively dense microhabitats and less time foraging (i.e., higher GUD) in relatively open microhabitats. This phenomenon has been attributed to those animals perceiving less predation risk when near or under shelter. However, the measurement has often confounded microhabitat density with distance from shelter in species without conspicuous dens. We measured GUD in foraging small mammals while experimentally manipulating microhabitat density and controlling for spatial location of the forager. Small mammals increased foraging (i.e., decreased GUD) as expected when we increased microhabitat density, but they did so despite those manipulations being randomly permuted spatially over the course of four rounds of data collection. Our results indicate that experimentally controlling for the potentially confounding effect of the forager’s distance to a safe location, such as dens, nests, or other shelters, did not remove the effect of microhabitat density on perceived predation risk. Thus, our results suggest that an animal’s perception of risk is likely mediated by both their location in their home range and the microhabitat at that location. We provide suggestions for further work.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":6879,"journal":{"name":"acta ethologica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10211-021-00365-y","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"acta ethologica","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10211-021-00365-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Prey animals must balance the benefits of foraging in a particular area with their risk of predation in that area and often prioritize indirect cues to predation risk over direct cues of predators when making decisions about foraging under the risk of predation. Researchers using giving-up density (GUD) as a metric to assess perceived predation risk have found that it is affected by microhabitat, with certain animals willing to spend more time foraging (i.e., lower GUD) in relatively dense microhabitats and less time foraging (i.e., higher GUD) in relatively open microhabitats. This phenomenon has been attributed to those animals perceiving less predation risk when near or under shelter. However, the measurement has often confounded microhabitat density with distance from shelter in species without conspicuous dens. We measured GUD in foraging small mammals while experimentally manipulating microhabitat density and controlling for spatial location of the forager. Small mammals increased foraging (i.e., decreased GUD) as expected when we increased microhabitat density, but they did so despite those manipulations being randomly permuted spatially over the course of four rounds of data collection. Our results indicate that experimentally controlling for the potentially confounding effect of the forager’s distance to a safe location, such as dens, nests, or other shelters, did not remove the effect of microhabitat density on perceived predation risk. Thus, our results suggest that an animal’s perception of risk is likely mediated by both their location in their home range and the microhabitat at that location. We provide suggestions for further work.
期刊介绍:
acta ethologica publishes empirical and theoretical research papers, short communications, commentaries, reviews and book reviews as well as methods papers in the field of ethology and related disciplines, with a strong concentration on the behavior biology of humans and other animals.
The journal places special emphasis on studies integrating proximate (mechanisms, development) and ultimate (function, evolution) levels in the analysis of behavior. Aspects of particular interest include: adaptive plasticity of behavior, inter-individual and geographic variations in behavior, mechanisms underlying behavior, evolutionary processes and functions of behavior, and many other topics.
acta ethologica is an official journal of ISPA, CRL and the Portuguese Ethological Society (SPE)