2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2011.01817.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Negotiating a noisy, information-rich environment in search of cryptic prey: olfactory predators need patchiness in prey cues

Abstract: Summary1. Olfactory predator search processes differ fundamentally to those based on vision, particularly when odour cues are deposited rather than airborne or emanating from a point source. When searching for visually cryptic prey that may have moved some distance from a deposited odour cue, cue context and spatial variability are the most likely sources of information about prey location available to an olfactory predator. 2. We tested whether the house mouse (Mus domesticus), a model olfactory predator, wou… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
(79 reference statements)
0
32
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The risks to receivers arising from the spatial and temporal persistence of signals may be exacerbated by signal predictability, especially if predators can form a search image for signals that are typically associated with successful predation (Carthey et al 2011). Nevertheless, prey frequently use signals that are predictable in time or space as they facilitate orientation within a home range and allow for the relative assessment of competitors (e.g.…”
Section: Signal Predictabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The risks to receivers arising from the spatial and temporal persistence of signals may be exacerbated by signal predictability, especially if predators can form a search image for signals that are typically associated with successful predation (Carthey et al 2011). Nevertheless, prey frequently use signals that are predictable in time or space as they facilitate orientation within a home range and allow for the relative assessment of competitors (e.g.…”
Section: Signal Predictabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Olfactorily searching predators require small-scale patchiness in prey cues to detect them from background odours (Carthey et al 2011), for example, while the visual complexity of the background impedes the detectability of prey by visual predators (Dimitrova & Merilaita 2012). Environmental conditions also affect the persistence and directionality of some signals and thus determine a predator's foraging success.…”
Section: Predator Identity Hunting Mode and Perceptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Predation risk is often associated with indirect cues from the environment, including open habitat (Powell and Banks 2004) or moonlight , or for arboreal animals, being on the ground (Mella et al 2014); and with direct cues such as the scats and urine of predators (Apfelbach et al 2005). As these cues vary spatially and temporally (Carthey et al 2011;Hughes et al 2012;Price and Banks 2012), so does the landscape of fear (Laundre et al 2001;van der Merwe and Brown 2008). Animals will forage in safe areas if they can (Banks 2001;Verdolin 2006) but when they must forage in risky areas, they adopt many behaviours to manage their risk, including reduced time allocation, increased vigilance, central place foraging and group foraging (Lima and Dill 1990).…”
Section: Dealing With Predation Riskmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although our model suggests, based on several assumptions (Table ), that nest predation could be reduced by priming, it is possible that continuing the deployment of bird odor throughout the breeding season (i.e., “camouflage”; Carthey et al. , Price and Banks , ) may have added further protective effects.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%