Australian native mammals recognize and respond to alien predators: a meta-analysis

Banks, Peter B.; Carthey, Alexandra J. R.; Bytheway, Jenna P.

doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.0857

Cited by 29 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We did not find significant levels of naiveté for mammalian prey in general, although exotic species are also the most frequent threat recorded for their extinctions [63]. Similar to our findings, a recent meta-analysis indicates that mammals in Australia identify exotic foxes and cats as a predation threat [38]. The authors argue that despite this lack of prey naiveté (level 1 sensu [19]) the rampant decline of prey by exotic mammals in Australia [64] might still be driven by inappropriate or ineffective prey responses (levels 2 and 3 naiveté sensu [19]), which are rarely quantified.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Our results support the view that prey naiveté is shaped by multiple eco-evolutionary factors [16,19,21,38]. The phenomenon is of increasing relevance to conservation, given that species introductions to novel ecosystems are accelerating globally [4], along with other forms of global change that might promote 'disturbed predator-prey interactions' (sensu [16]).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Global determinants of prey naiveté to exotic predators

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prey naiveté—the failure of prey to recognize novel predators as threats—is thought to exacerbate the impact that exotic predators exert on prey populations. Prey naiveté varies under the influence of eco-evolutionary mediating factors, such as biogeographic isolation and prey adaptation, although an overall quantification of their influence is lacking. We conducted a global meta-analysis to test the effects of several hypothesized mediating factors on the expression of prey naiveté. Prey were overall naive towards exotic predators in marine and freshwater systems but not in terrestrial systems. Prey naiveté was most pronounced towards exotic predators that did not have native congeneric relatives in the recipient community. Time since introduction was relevant, as prey naiveté declined with the number of generations since introduction; on average, around 200 generations may be required to erode naiveté sufficiently for prey to display antipredator behaviour towards exotic predators. Given that exotic predators are a major cause of extinction, the global predictors and trends of prey naiveté presented here can inform efforts to meet conservation targets.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Global determinants of prey naiveté to exotic predators

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Introduced predators often have greater impacts on wildlife than native predators due in part to evolutionary naïveté, which occurs when native prey lack adequate adaptions to detect and avoid novel predators (Saul & Jeschke ; Banks et al . ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Understanding predator densities for successful co‐existence of alien predators and threatened prey

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The high failure rate of threatened species translocations has prompted many managers to fence areas to protect wildlife from introduced predators. However, conservation fencing is expensive, restrictive and exacerbates prey na€ ıvet e reducing the chance of future co-existence between native prey and introduced predators. Here, we ask whether two globally threatened mammal species protected in fenced reserves, with a history of predation-driven decline and reintroduction failure, could co-exist with introduced predators. We defined coexistence as population persistence for at least 3 years and successful recruitment. We manipulated the density of feral cats within a large fenced paddock and measured the impact on abundance and reproduction of 353 reintroduced burrowing bettongs and 47 greater bilbies over 3 years. We increased cat densities from 0.038 to 0.46 per square km and both threatened species survived, reproduced and increased their population size. However, a previous reintroduction trial of 66 bettongs into the same paddock found one red fox (Vulpes vulpes), at a density of 0.027 per square km, drove the bettong population extinct within 12 months. Our results show that different predator species vary in their impact and that despite a history of reintroduction failure, threatened mammal species can co-exist with low densities of feral cats. There may be a threshold density below which it is possible to maintain unfenced populations of reintroduced marsupials. Understanding the numerical relationships between population densities of introduced predators and threatened species is urgently needed if these species are to be re-established at landscape scales. Such knowledge will enable a priori assessment of the risk of reintroduction failure thereby increasing the likelihood of reintroduction success and reducing the financial and ethical cost of failed translocations.

show abstract

“…Thirty articles from 22 journals out of 28 139 unique records retrieved by the searches for meta‐analyses met all the eligibility criteria (flow diagram: Appendix S3; list of eligible articles: Appendix S4; list of articles excluded at full text and unobtainable records: Appendix S5), resulting in 137 eligible meta‐analyses (ie, 137 overall mean effect sizes without duplication of primary studies between meta‐analyses presented in the 30 articles, 32‐61 hence retaining independence of individual effect sizes). These 30 eligible meta‐analytical articles conducted diverse searches in addition to the single‐platform search in WoS (Figure 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the risk of bias in choice of search sources for environmental meta‐analyses

Konno

Pullin

2020

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results of meta‐analyses are potentially valuable for informing environmental policy and practice decisions. However, selective sampling of primary studies through searches exclusively using widely used bibliographic platform(s) could bias estimates of effect sizes. Such search strategies are common in environmental evidence reviews, and if risk of bias can be detected, this would provide the first empirical evidence that comprehensiveness of searches needs to be improved. We compare the impact of using single and multiple bibliographic platform(s) searches vs more comprehensive searches on estimates of mean effect sizes. We used 137 published meta‐analyses, based on multiple source searches, analyzing 9388 studies: 8095 sourced from commercially published articles; and 1293 from grey literature and unpublished data. Single‐platform and multiple‐platform searches missed studies in 100 and 80 of the meta‐analyses, respectively: 52 and 46 meta‐analyses provided larger‐effect estimates; 32 and 28 meta‐analyses provided smaller‐effect estimates; eight and four meta‐analyses provided opposite direction of estimates; and two each were unable to estimate effects due to missing all studies. Further, we found significant positive log‐linear relationships between proportions of studies missed and the deviations of mean effect sizes, suggesting that as the number of studies missed increases, deviation of mean effect size is likely to expand. We also found significant differences in mean effect sizes between indexed and non‐indexed studies for 35% of meta‐analyses, indicating high risk of bias when the searches were restricted. We conclude that the restricted searches are likely to lead to unrepresentative samples of studies and biased estimates of true effects.

show abstract

Australian native mammals recognize and respond to alien predators: a meta-analysis

Cited by 29 publications

References 57 publications

Global determinants of prey naiveté to exotic predators

Global determinants of prey naiveté to exotic predators

Understanding predator densities for successful co‐existence of alien predators and threatened prey

Assessing the risk of bias in choice of search sources for environmental meta‐analyses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About