Landscape-level movement patterns by lions in western Serengeti: comparing the influence of inter-specific competitors, habitat attributes and prey availability

Abstract

BackgroundWhere apex predators move on the landscape influences ecosystem structure and function and is therefore key to effective landscape-level management and species-specific conservation. However the factors underlying predator distribution patterns within functional ecosystems are poorly understood. Predator movement should be sensitive to the spatial patterns of inter-specific competitors, spatial variation in prey density, and landscape attributes that increase individual prey vulnerability. We investigated the relative role of these fundamental factors on seasonal resource utilization by a globally endangered apex carnivore, the African lion (Panthera leo) in Tanzania’s Serengeti National Park. Lion space use was represented by novel landscape-level, modified utilization distributions (termed “localized density distributions”) created from telemetry relocations of individual lions from multiple neighbouring prides. Spatial patterns of inter-specific competitors were similarly determined from telemetry re-locations of spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta), this system’s primary competitor for lions; prey distribution was derived from 18 months of detailed census data; and remote sensing data was used to represent relevant habitat attributes.ResultsLion space use was consistently influenced by landscape attributes that increase individual prey vulnerability to predation. Wet season activity, when available prey were scarce, was concentrated near embankments, which provide ambush opportunities, and dry season activity, when available prey were abundant, near remaining water sources where prey occurrence is predictable. Lion space use patterns were positively associated with areas of high prey biomass, but only in the prey abundant dry season. Finally, at the broad scale of this analysis, lion and hyena space use was positively correlated in the comparatively prey-rich dry season and unrelated in the wet season, suggesting lion movement was unconstrained by the spatial patterns of their main inter-specific competitors.ConclusionsThe availability of potential prey and vulnerability of that prey to predation both motivate lion movement decisions, with their relative importance apparently mediated by overall prey abundance. With practical and theoretical implications, these results suggest that while top carnivores are consistently cognizant of how landscape features influence individual prey vulnerability, they also adopt a flexible approach to range use by adjusting spatial behaviour according to fluctuations in local prey abundance.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40462-016-0082-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Maximising camera trap data: Using attractants to improve detection of elusive species in multi-species surveys

“…Alterations to existing risk dynamics may temporarily reduce detection probability of the prey species [33, 51, 52]. However, predators also follow prey movements [53]. In this study, both golden cat and blue duiker, which are an important golden cat prey [38], were less active at camera stations immediately after attractant was replaced.…”

Movement, Behavior, and Habitat Use of a Marine Apex Predator, the Scalloped Hammerhead

“…The majority of tagged scalloped hammerheads displayed area-restricted movements, with limited evidence of behavioral switches to transiting movements. Several potential factors have been suggested to influence the site fidelity, home range size, and proportion of time a predator spends engaged in area-restricted searching versus transiting movements, including proximate cues such as prey abundance and inter-specific competition (Kittle et al, 2016), and ultimate drivers such as reproductive success (Patrick and Weimerskirch, 2017). The DCRWS modeling identified behavioral switches between transiting and arearestricted movements in two scalloped hammerheads.…”

Landscape‐level wolf space use is correlated with prey abundance, ease of mobility, and the distribution of prey habitat

“…Although this did provide considerable analytical depth, the method is not restricted to use with such data-rich studies. Where fewer social groups are monitored and/or for a shorter duration, it is still possible to develop populationlevel LDDs from which meaningful inferences can be drawn (e.g., Kittle et al 2016). An important caveat here is that the influence of group-level variation in spatial behavior on observed patterns should be inversely correlated with the number of groups monitored.…”