Summary 1.Resource selection functions (RSFs) are becoming a dominant tool in habitat selection studies. RSF coefficients can be estimated with unconditional (standard) and conditional logistic regressions. While the advantage of mixed-effects models is recognized for standard logistic regression, mixed conditional logistic regression remains largely overlooked in ecological studies. 2. We demonstrate the significance of mixed conditional logistic regression for habitat selection studies. First, we use spatially explicit models to illustrate how mixed-effects RSFs can be useful in the presence of inter-individual heterogeneity in selection and when the assumption of independence from irrelevant alternatives (IIA) is violated. The IIA hypothesis states that the strength of preference for habitat type A over habitat type B does not depend on the other habitat types also available. Secondly, we demonstrate the significance of mixed-effects models to evaluate habitat selection of free-ranging bison Bison bison. 3. When movement rules were homogeneous among individuals and the IIA assumption was respected, fixed-effects RSFs adequately described habitat selection by simulated animals. In situations violating the inter-individual homogeneity and IIA assumptions, however, RSFs were best estimated with mixed-effects regressions, and fixed-effects models could even provide faulty conclusions. 4. Mixed-effects models indicate that bison did not select farmlands, but exhibited strong interindividual variations in their response to farmlands. Less than half of the bison preferred farmlands over forests. Conversely, the fixed-effect model simply suggested an overall selection for farmlands. 5. Conditional logistic regression is recognized as a powerful approach to evaluate habitat selection when resource availability changes. This regression is increasingly used in ecological studies, but almost exclusively in the context of fixed-effects models. Fitness maximization can imply differences in trade-offs among individuals, which can yield inter-individual differences in selection and lead to departure from IIA. These situations are best modelled with mixed-effects models. Mixed-effects conditional logistic regression should become a valuable tool for ecological research.

No abstract

The predator–prey space game and the costs associated with risk effects are affected by prey 1) proactive adjustments (when prey modify their behaviour in response to an a priori assessment of the risk level) and 2) reactive adjustments (when prey have detected an immediate threat). Proactive adjustments are generally well‐studied, whereas the frequency, strength and duration of reactive adjustments remain largely unknown. We studied the space use and habitat selection of GPS‐collared zebras Equus quagga from 2 to 48 h after an encounter with lions Panthera leo. Lion–zebra encounters generally occurred close to artificial waterholes (< 1 km). Two hours after an encounter, zebras were more likely to have fled than stay when the encounter occurred in more risky bushy areas. During their flight, zebras selected grasslands more than usual, getting great visibility. Regardless of their initial response, zebras finally fled at the end of the night and reached areas located far from waterholes where encounters with lions are less frequent. The large‐scale flights (∼4–5 km) of zebras led to a local zebra depression for lions. Zebras that had fled immediately after the encounter resumed their behaviour of coming close to waterholes on the following day. However, zebras that had initially stayed remained far from waterholes for an extra 24 h, remaining an elusive prey for longer. The delay in the flight decision had different short‐term consequences on the lion–zebra game. We reveal that the spatial context of the encounter shapes the immediate response of prey, and that encountering predators induces strong behavioural responses: prey flee towards distant, safer, areas and have a constrained use of key resource areas which are at the heart of the predator–prey game at larger spatio‐temporal scales. Nighttime encounters were infrequent (once every 35 days on average), zebra responses were short‐lived (< 36 h) but occurred over a large spatial scale (several km).