Context dependence of elk (<i>Cervus elaphus</i>) vigilance and wolf (<i>Canis lupus</i>) predation risk

Eisenberg, Cristina; Hibbs, David E.; Ripple, William J.; Salwasser, Hal

doi:10.1139/cjz-2014-0049

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 40 publications

(54 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Hamilton et al (1980) concluded that most browsing by moose took place within 80 m from forest cover and browsing intensity dropped significantly beyond 80 m. Both these studies suggest that effects of predation risk on moose only occur in larger clear-cuts, with at least 100 m distance to edge. In contrast, in areas with low to moderate wolf presence, elk did not increase vigilance levels with increasing distance to forest edge (Eisenberg et al 2014) and increased their use of preferred grassland foraging habitats (Creel et al 2005). Since we took a random selection of clear-cuts in our study area, this indicates that clear cuts in our study region are generally smaller (i.e.…”

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…As a result elk moved into the protective cover of wooded areas when wolves were often present. In contrast, in areas with low to moderate wolf presence, elk did not increase vigilance levels with increasing distance to forest edge (Eisenberg et al 2014) and increased their use of preferred grassland foraging habitats (Creel et al 2005). Hence, the wolf density and the frequency at which wolves are present in an area can determine the perceived risk of their prey species for potential risk factors, such as a forest edge.…”

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Molvar and Bowyer (1994) found that moose spent less time feeding when at 200-500 m away from cover than at 0-50 m from cover. For example Eisenberg et al (2014) found that elk in areas with high wolf population density tended to increase vigilance levels with increasing distance from the forest edge. The clear-cuts that we measured in the present study were generally smaller, with a shorter distance to the closest forest edge, which may explain why we did not find an effect.…”

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, the lack of a consistent effect of forest edge could also be related to anti-predator behavior being context dependent with wolf density. For example Eisenberg et al (2014) found that elk in areas with high wolf population density tended to increase vigilance levels with increasing distance from the forest edge. As a result elk moved into the protective cover of wooded areas when wolves were often present.…”

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Does wolf presence reduce moose browsing intensity in young forest plantations?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large carnivores can be a key factor in shaping their ungulate prey's behavior, which may affect lower trophic levels. While most studies on trade-offs between food acquisition and risk avoidance by ungulate prey species have been conducted in areas with limited human impact, carnivores are now increasingly returning to highly anthropogenic landscapes. Many of these landscapes are dominated by forestry, and ungulateforestry conflicts are an increasing issue. The aim of this study was to test if the indirect effects of a re-colonizing large predator, the wolf Canis lupus, results in a change in browsing intensity by moose Alces alces in young forest plantations in a boreal forest in Sweden. We selected 24 different forest plantations, with 12 located in low-wolf and 12 in high-wolf utilization areas. In each plantation, we measured browsing intensity, tree height, tree density, distance to the closest forest edge and we counted the number of moose pellet groups. In contrast to our predictions, wolf utilization was not the main driver of moose browsing patterns. Instead, moose browsing intensity declined with tree density and height. Separate analyses on the main tree species showed that wolf utilization had an influence, but browsing intensity was in fact higher in the high-wolf utilization areas for three out of five tree species. This pattern seemed to be driven by a strong confounding relationship between wolf utilization, tree density and height, which were both lower in the high-wolf utilization areas. We argue that this confounding effect is due to wolves being pushed towards the less productive parts of the landscape away from human activity centers. Therefore, we concluded that in order to better understand carnivore driven risk-mediated effects on herbivore behavior in anthropogenic landscapes we need to better understand the complexity of humancarnivore-prey-ecosystem interactions.

show abstract

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Differences In Tree Height and Density Not Wolf Predation Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Does wolf presence reduce moose browsing intensity in young forest plantations?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Larger animals (ungulates and primates) have been shown to select habitat where the sightlines allow good visibility of approaching predators Abu Baker & Brown, 2013;. Lastly, a number of studies studying wolf-elk interactions show that based on habitat variability the strategies applied by the elk to avoid predation (vigilance, habitat selection) can vary greatly (Hebblewhite, Merrill & McDonald, 2005;Eisenberg et al, 2014) Other strategic choices of prey driven by the predator-prey dynamics can include dietary selection and movement patterns. For example (again in the Heteromyid rodents), foragers better equipped for risk management (kangaroo rats) have a more diverse diet than the foragers less well equipped for predator management (pocket mice) who forage what they can (Davidson, Brown & Inouye, 1980).…”

Section: B Non-consumptive Effects Of Predators: An "Ecology Of Fear"mentioning

confidence: 99%

The landscape of fear conceptual framework: definition and review of current applications and misuses

Bleicher

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Landscapes of Fear (LOF), the spatially explicit distribution of perceived predation risk as seen by a population, is increasingly cited in ecological literature and has become a frequently used "buzz-word". With the increase in popularity, it became necessary to clarify the definition for the term, suggest boundaries and propose a common framework for its use. The LOF, as a progeny of the "ecology of fear" conceptual framework, defines fear as the strategic manifest of the cost-benefit analysis of food and safety tradeoffs. In addition to direct predation risk, the LOF is affected by individuals' energetic-state, interand intra-specific competition and is constrained by the evolutionary history of each species. Herein, based on current applications of the LOF conceptual framework, I suggest the future research in this framework will be directed towards: (1) AbstractLandscapes of Fear (LOF), the spatially explicit distribution of perceived predation risk as seen by a population, is increasingly cited in ecological literature and has become a frequently used "buzz-word". With the increase in popularity, it became necessary to clarify the definition for the term, suggest boundaries and propose a common framework for its use. The LOF, as a progeny of the "ecology of fear" conceptual framework, defines fear as the strategic manifest of the cost-benefit analysis of food and safety tradeoffs. In addition to direct predation risk, the LOF is affected by individuals' energetic-state, inter-and intra-specific competition and is constrained by the evolutionary history of each species. Herein, based on current applications of the LOF conceptual framework, I suggest the future research in this framework will be directed towards: (1) finding applied management uses as a trait defining a population's habitat-use and habitat-suitability; (2) studying multi-dimensional distribution of risk-assessment through time and space; (3) studying variability between individuals within a population; and (4) measuring eco-neurological implications of risk as a feature of environmental heterogeneity.3 | Bleicher Landscapes of Fear

show abstract

The primacy of density‐mediated indirect effects in a community of wolves, elk, and aspen

Brice,

Larsen,

Stahler

et al. 2024

Ecological Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The removal or addition of a predator in an ecosystem can trigger a trophic cascade, whereby the predator indirectly influences plants and/or abiotic processes via direct effects on its herbivore prey. A trophic cascade can operate through a density‐mediated indirect effect (DMIE), where the predator reduces herbivore density via predation, and/or through a trait‐mediated indirect effect (TMIE), where the predator induces an herbivore trait response that modifies the herbivore's effect on plants. Manipulative experiments suggest that TMIEs are an equivalent or more important driver of trophic cascades than are DMIEs. Whether this applies generally in nature is uncertain because few studies have directly compared the magnitudes of TMIEs and DMIEs on natural unmanipulated field patterns. A TMIE is often invoked to explain the textbook trophic cascade involving wolves (Canis lupus), elk (Cervus canadensis), and aspen (Populus tremuloides) in northern Yellowstone National Park. This hypothesis posits that wolves indirectly increase recruitment of young aspen into the overstory primarily through reduced elk browsing in response to spatial variation in wolf predation risk rather than through reduced elk population density. To test this hypothesis, we compared the effects of spatiotemporal variation in wolf predation risk and temporal variation in elk population density on unmanipulated patterns of browsing and recruitment of young aspen across 113 aspen stands over a 21‐year period (1999–2019) in northern Yellowstone National Park. Only 2 of 10 indices of wolf predation risk had statistically meaningful effects on browsing and recruitment of young aspen, and these effects were 8–28 times weaker than the effect of elk density. To the extent that temporal variation in elk density was attributable to wolf predation, our results suggest that the wolf–elk–aspen trophic cascade was primarily density‐mediated rather than trait‐mediated. This aligns with the alternative hypothesis that wolves and other actively hunting predators with broad habitat domains cause DMIEs to dominate whenever prey, such as elk, also have a broad habitat domain. For at least this type of predator–prey community, our study suggests that risk‐induced trait responses can be abstracted or ignored while still achieving an accurate understanding of trophic cascades.

show abstract

Context dependence of elk (Cervus elaphus) vigilance and wolf (Canis lupus) predation risk

Cited by 14 publications

References 40 publications

Does wolf presence reduce moose browsing intensity in young forest plantations?

Does wolf presence reduce moose browsing intensity in young forest plantations?

The landscape of fear conceptual framework: definition and review of current applications and misuses

The primacy of density‐mediated indirect effects in a community of wolves, elk, and aspen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About