恐惧景观作为安全生态场:实验证据。

IF 2.1 3区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Biosemiotics Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1
Almo Farina, Philip James
{"title":"恐惧景观作为安全生态场:实验证据。","authors":"Almo Farina,&nbsp;Philip James","doi":"10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a development of the ecosemiotic vivo-scape concept, a 'safety eco-field' is proposed as a model of a species response to the safety of its environment. The safety eco-field is based on the ecosemiotic approach which considers environmental safety as a resource sought and chosen by individuals to counter predatory pressure. To test the relative safety of different locations within a landscape, 66 bird feeders (BF) were deployed in a regular 15 × 15 m grid in a rural area, surrounded by shrubs, small trees, hedgerows, and buildings. On each of 48 days in November 2021 and February and March 2022, dried mealworms were placed on each BF and counts of larvae at each BF were made at noon and dusk. The European robin (<i>Erithacus rubecula</i>) and the great tit (<i>Parus major</i>) were the most regular visitors to the BFs. Land cover at each BF was recorded. Bird behaviour at the BFs was noted from direct video recordings of the birds at nine selected BFs, totalling 32 daily sessions in March. The different behaviours of the European robin and the great tit were observable. The safety eco-field changed according to the month and the time of day. The distance of the BF from the woodland edges seemed to be important only in the morning. In the afternoon, BFs that were more distant from the woodland edges received the highest number of visits. Weather conditions were found to influence the number of mealworms removed, but this requires further investigation. A significant relationship between land cover and the number of mealworm larvae removed from the BFs was observed. Within the grid of BF, three regions were distinguishable which were related to land cover in the safety eco-field process. The experimental framework confirms the adequacy, at least for birds that have cryptic predators, to map the landscape as a proxy of safety resource. From the video recordings it was noted that the European robin visits were distributed throughout the day without apparent temporal preferences, while the great tit visits were concentrated in the central part of the day. This result has the limitation of the short period of observation (March) and should be extended to the entire period of the experiment to eventually capture seasonal variation. The experimental evidence obtained confirms that the ecosemiotic-based models of safety eco-field are an efficient approach to explain bird feeding preferences and behaviours.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1.</p>","PeriodicalId":49230,"journal":{"name":"Biosemiotics","volume":"16 1","pages":"61-84"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9979121/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Landscape of Fear as a Safety Eco-Field: Experimental Evidence.\",\"authors\":\"Almo Farina,&nbsp;Philip James\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In a development of the ecosemiotic vivo-scape concept, a 'safety eco-field' is proposed as a model of a species response to the safety of its environment. The safety eco-field is based on the ecosemiotic approach which considers environmental safety as a resource sought and chosen by individuals to counter predatory pressure. To test the relative safety of different locations within a landscape, 66 bird feeders (BF) were deployed in a regular 15 × 15 m grid in a rural area, surrounded by shrubs, small trees, hedgerows, and buildings. On each of 48 days in November 2021 and February and March 2022, dried mealworms were placed on each BF and counts of larvae at each BF were made at noon and dusk. The European robin (<i>Erithacus rubecula</i>) and the great tit (<i>Parus major</i>) were the most regular visitors to the BFs. Land cover at each BF was recorded. Bird behaviour at the BFs was noted from direct video recordings of the birds at nine selected BFs, totalling 32 daily sessions in March. The different behaviours of the European robin and the great tit were observable. The safety eco-field changed according to the month and the time of day. The distance of the BF from the woodland edges seemed to be important only in the morning. In the afternoon, BFs that were more distant from the woodland edges received the highest number of visits. Weather conditions were found to influence the number of mealworms removed, but this requires further investigation. A significant relationship between land cover and the number of mealworm larvae removed from the BFs was observed. Within the grid of BF, three regions were distinguishable which were related to land cover in the safety eco-field process. The experimental framework confirms the adequacy, at least for birds that have cryptic predators, to map the landscape as a proxy of safety resource. From the video recordings it was noted that the European robin visits were distributed throughout the day without apparent temporal preferences, while the great tit visits were concentrated in the central part of the day. This result has the limitation of the short period of observation (March) and should be extended to the entire period of the experiment to eventually capture seasonal variation. The experimental evidence obtained confirms that the ecosemiotic-based models of safety eco-field are an efficient approach to explain bird feeding preferences and behaviours.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49230,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biosemiotics\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"61-84\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9979121/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biosemiotics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biosemiotics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在生态学的活体景观概念的发展中,“安全生态场”被提出作为物种对其环境安全反应的模型。安全生态领域是建立在生态学方法的基础上的,它认为环境安全是个体为对抗掠夺性压力而寻求和选择的资源。为了测试景观中不同位置的相对安全性,在农村地区的一个15 × 15米的常规网格中部署了66个喂鸟器(BF),周围是灌木、小树、树篱和建筑物。于2021年11月和2022年2月和3月,每隔48天将干粉虫放置在每个高炉上,并于中午和黄昏对每个高炉的幼虫进行计数。欧洲知更鸟(Erithacus rubecula)和大山雀(Parus major)是BFs的最常客。记录了每个高炉的土地覆盖情况。研究人员在3月份对9个选定的鸟类保护区的鸟类进行了直接录像,记录了鸟类在保护区的行为,每天共32次。可以观察到欧洲知更鸟和大山雀的不同行为。安全生态场随月份和时间的变化而变化。BF离林地边缘的距离似乎只有在早晨才重要。在下午,离林地边缘越远的生物群获得的访问次数最多。研究发现,天气条件会影响被清除的粉虫数量,但这需要进一步调查。土地覆被与土壤中粉虫幼虫的数量有显著关系。在BF网格内,可区分出与安全生态场过程中土地覆盖相关的三个区域。这个实验框架证实了,至少对于那些有神秘捕食者的鸟类来说,将景观地图作为安全资源的代理是充分的。从视频记录中可以看出,欧洲知更鸟的访问分布在全天,没有明显的时间偏好,而大山雀的访问集中在一天的中心部分。这一结果具有观测周期短(3月)的局限性,应扩展到整个实验周期,最终捕捉季节变化。实验结果表明,基于生态符号学的安全生态场模型是解释鸟类摄食偏好和行为的有效方法。补充资料:在线版本提供补充资料,网址为10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Landscape of Fear as a Safety Eco-Field: Experimental Evidence.

In a development of the ecosemiotic vivo-scape concept, a 'safety eco-field' is proposed as a model of a species response to the safety of its environment. The safety eco-field is based on the ecosemiotic approach which considers environmental safety as a resource sought and chosen by individuals to counter predatory pressure. To test the relative safety of different locations within a landscape, 66 bird feeders (BF) were deployed in a regular 15 × 15 m grid in a rural area, surrounded by shrubs, small trees, hedgerows, and buildings. On each of 48 days in November 2021 and February and March 2022, dried mealworms were placed on each BF and counts of larvae at each BF were made at noon and dusk. The European robin (Erithacus rubecula) and the great tit (Parus major) were the most regular visitors to the BFs. Land cover at each BF was recorded. Bird behaviour at the BFs was noted from direct video recordings of the birds at nine selected BFs, totalling 32 daily sessions in March. The different behaviours of the European robin and the great tit were observable. The safety eco-field changed according to the month and the time of day. The distance of the BF from the woodland edges seemed to be important only in the morning. In the afternoon, BFs that were more distant from the woodland edges received the highest number of visits. Weather conditions were found to influence the number of mealworms removed, but this requires further investigation. A significant relationship between land cover and the number of mealworm larvae removed from the BFs was observed. Within the grid of BF, three regions were distinguishable which were related to land cover in the safety eco-field process. The experimental framework confirms the adequacy, at least for birds that have cryptic predators, to map the landscape as a proxy of safety resource. From the video recordings it was noted that the European robin visits were distributed throughout the day without apparent temporal preferences, while the great tit visits were concentrated in the central part of the day. This result has the limitation of the short period of observation (March) and should be extended to the entire period of the experiment to eventually capture seasonal variation. The experimental evidence obtained confirms that the ecosemiotic-based models of safety eco-field are an efficient approach to explain bird feeding preferences and behaviours.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12304-023-09522-1.

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
Biosemiotics
Biosemiotics HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
37.50%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biosemiotics is dedicated to building a bridge between biology, philosophy, linguistics, and the communication sciences. Biosemiotic research is concerned with the study of signs and meaning in living organisms and systems. Its main challenge is to naturalize biological meaning and information by building on the belief that signs are fundamental, constitutive components of the living world. Biosemiotics has triggered rethinking of fundamental assumptions in both biology and semiotics. In this view, biology should recognize the semiotic nature of life and reshape its theories and methodology accordingly while semiotics and the humanities should acknowledge the existence of signs beyond the human realm. Biosemiotics is at the cutting edge of research on the fundamentals of life. By challenging traditional assumptions on the nature of life and suggesting alternative perspectives, it opens up exciting new research paths.
期刊最新文献
Aesthetics or Communication?: Social Semiotic Traits of Structured Forms in Studies of “Animal Beauty” Organizing Microbial Diversity and Interspecies Relations through Diagrams: Trees, Maps, and the Visual Semiotics of the Living Technology and Interspecies Musical Practice Umwelt and Melody: The Inter-Species Dynamics of Search and Rescue Dog Teams Jakob von Uexküll, Heterophenomenology, and Behavior Systems I: Core Ethology and Merleau-Ponty
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1