Behaviorally-mediated trophic cascade attenuated by prey use of risky places at safe times

Palmer, Meredith S.; Portales‐Reyes, Cristina; Potter, Caitlin; Mech, L. David; Isbell, Forest

doi:10.1007/s00442-020-04816-4

Cited by 22 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 96 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Deer fawns in the southeastern United States increased diurnal activity compared with adult deer to avoid their primary predator, coyotes (Crawford et al, 2021 , Higdon et al, 2019 ). Deer exposed to wolf urine in a wolf‐free environment become more diurnal (Palmer et al, 2021 ), suggesting that reduced nocturnal behavior is a general deer reaction to predation risk and not a response to nocturnal activity from sympatric predators. It would, therefore, be interesting to determine whether deer have the behavioral plasticity to shift fawn activity toward nocturnality if confronted by a primarily diurnal risk such as humans in a system lacking fawn predators.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…White‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ; hereafter deer) adults and juveniles experience differing predation risks (Chitwood et al, 2015 ) and respond differently to predation risk (Gulsby et al, 2018 ). Demographic variability in diel activity may be an important predator defense for deer, which reduce nocturnal activity of young fawns to reduce their exposure to coyotes ( Canis latrans ; Higdon et al, 2019 , Crawford et al, 2021 ) and when exposed to wolf urine (Palmer et al, 2021 ). However, these studies examined deer temporal responses to a single predator, whereas fawns in most deer populations are killed by multiple predators and humans (Gingery et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

White‐tailed deer exploit temporal refuge from multi‐predator and human risks on roads

Kautz

Fowler

Petroelje

et al. 2022

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although most prey have multiple predator species, few studies have quantified how prey respond to the temporal niches of multiple predators which pose different levels of danger. For example, intraspecific variation in diel activity allows white‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) to reduce fawn activity overlap with coyotes (Canis latrans ) but finding safe times of day may be more difficult for fawns in a multi‐predator context. We hypothesized that within a multi‐predator system, deer would allocate antipredation behavior optimally based on combined mortality risk from multiple sources, which would vary depending on fawn presence. We measured cause‐specific mortality of 777 adult (>1‐year‐old) and juvenile (1–4‐month‐old) deer and used 300 remote cameras to estimate the activity of deer, humans, and predators including American black bears ( Ursus americanus ), bobcats ( Lynx rufus ), coyotes, and wolves ( Canis lupus ). Predation and vehicle collisions accounted for 5.3 times greater mortality in juveniles (16% mortality from bears, coyotes, bobcats, wolves, and vehicles) compared with adults (3% mortality from coyotes, wolves, and vehicles). Deer nursery groups (i.e., ≥1 fawn present) were more diurnal than adult deer without fawns, causing fawns to have 24–38% less overlap with carnivores and 39% greater overlap with humans. Supporting our hypothesis, deer nursery groups appeared to optimize diel activity to minimize combined mortality risk. Temporal refuge for fawns was likely the result of carnivores avoiding humans, simplifying diel risk of five species into a trade‐off between diurnal humans and nocturnal carnivores. Functional redundancy among multiple predators with shared behaviors may partially explain why white‐tailed deer fawn predation rates are often similar among single‐ and multi‐predator systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

White‐tailed deer exploit temporal refuge from multi‐predator and human risks on roads

Kautz

Fowler

Petroelje

et al. 2022

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Food limitations (quality and quantity) could be the more important drivers -but this is insufficiently addressed in the scientific literature or in hunting publications (magazines, videos, etc. ), as could be behavior adjustment by ungulates and increased vigilance that decrease their visibility (Palmer et al, 2021). There is substantial evidence in eastern North America that coyote range expansions do not affect white-tailed deer demography or recruitment (Bragina et al, 2019).…”

Section: The Myth: Predators As Major Threats To Livestock and Ungulatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Behaviorally mediated cascading impacts are thought to affect many ecosystem components, including benefitting primary producers. Experimental studies have documented changes in herbivore behavior in the presence of predator cues such as urine or vocalizations (Calkoen et al, 2021), but predator presence does not necessarily result in significant behaviorally mediated cascades that benefit primary producers eaten by deer (Palmer et al, 2021), moose (Alces alces) or African ungulates Ausilio et al, 2021;Sand et al, 2021). Instead, large herbivores, in response to presence of large predators, change their activity patterns and graze in risky areas of high nutritional value when predation risk is low, for example when wolves rest (Kohl et al, 2018).…”

Section: Wishful Thinking -Wolves and Other Predators Can Control Lar...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Myths, Wishful Thinking, and Accountability in Predator Conservation and Management in the United States

Blossey

Hare

2022

Front. Conserv. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large predators are thought of as ecological keystone species, posterchildren of conservation campaigns, and sought-after targets of tourists and photographers. At the same time, predators kill livestock and huntable animals, and occasionally people, triggering fears and antipathy among those living alongside them. Until the 1960’s government-sponsored eradication and persecution campaigns in the United States prioritized interests of livestock producers and recreational hunters, leading to eradication of wolves and bears over much of their range. Without large predators, subsidized by changes in agricultural practices and milder winters, ungulate populations erupted, triggering negative ecological impacts, economic damage, and human health crises (such as tick-borne diseases). Shifting societal preferences have ushered in more predator-friendly, but controversial wildlife policies, from passively allowing range expansion to purposeful reintroductions (such as release of wolves in Yellowstone National Park). Attempts to restore wolves or mountain lions in the U.S. and protecting coyotes appear to enjoy strong public support, but many state wildlife agencies charged with managing wildlife, and recreational hunters continue to oppose such efforts, because they perceive predators as competitors for huntable animals. There may be compelling reasons for restoring predators or allowing them to recolonize their former ranges. But if range expansion or intentional releases of large predators do not result in ecosystem recovery, reduced deer populations, or Lyme disease reductions, conservationists who have put their reputation on the line and assured decision makers and the public of the important functional role of large predators may lose public standing and trust. Exaggerated predictions by ranchers and recreational hunters of greatly reduced ungulate populations and rampant livestock killing by large carnivores may lead to poaching and illegal killing threatening recovery of predator populations. How the return of large carnivores may affect vegetation and successional change, ungulate population size, other biota, livestock and human attitudes in different landscapes has not been appropriately assessed. Societal support and acceptance of living alongside predators as they expand their range and increase in abundance requires development and monitoring of social, ecological and economic indicators to assess how return of large predators affects human and animal and plant livelihoods.

show abstract

“…Predators can alter prey populations directly through lethal offtake and/or behaviourally mediated indirect effects [1][2][3]. While some prey succumb, others avoid predation by changing their behaviour and life-histories [4,5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eat or Be Eaten: Implications of potential exploitative competition between wolves and humans across predator- savvy and -naive deer populations

Candler

Chakrabarti

Severud

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predator recolonization often evokes innate as well as learnt anti-predatory responses in prey. To test white-tailed deer risk allocation amidst an expanding wolf population in Michigan, we used a paired experimental approach to investigate deer behavior in areas with and without wolves. We treated sites with wolf urine, a novel scent (lemon juice), and a control (distilled water), and used remote cameras to observe deer vigilance, diel activity, and abundance before and after treatment. We also examined the effect of vegetation cover/predator ambush potential on deer vigilance. For most deer-response metrics, wolf urine had no effect irrespective of actual wolf presence or absence. However, we observed a difference in the overall diel pattern of deer in areas with wolf presence versus without. Further, we detected significant shifts in diel activity in both areas pre- and post-treatment. While such shifts were not consistent, we could detect a reduction in crepuscular deer activity in areas where deer coexist with wolves. While deer vigilance was typically unaffected by treatments, habitat cover was found to be pivotal. We observed a significant positive effect of vegetation cover on deer vigilance at sites where wolves were present. These results likely indicate that predator cues affect deer vigilance more acutely in denser habitats, which presumably facilitate higher predator success. We did not observe a similar response in the predator-naive deer population. In areas where human and non-human predators hunt the same prey, predator presence may thus negatively impact human hunting success through exploitative competition by making deer more vigilant. However, hunters may avoid such competition by choosing hunting/bait sites located in open areas. Our results on fundamental predation ecology have strong applied implications for fostering human-predator coexistence.

show abstract

Behaviorally-mediated trophic cascade attenuated by prey use of risky places at safe times

Cited by 22 publications

References 96 publications

White‐tailed deer exploit temporal refuge from multi‐predator and human risks on roads

White‐tailed deer exploit temporal refuge from multi‐predator and human risks on roads

Myths, Wishful Thinking, and Accountability in Predator Conservation and Management in the United States

Eat or Be Eaten: Implications of potential exploitative competition between wolves and humans across predator- savvy and -naive deer populations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About