Nowhere to hide: pumas, black bears, and competition refuges

Elbroch, L. Mark; Lendrum, Patrick E.; Allen, Maximilian L.; Wittmer, Heiko

doi:10.1093/beheco/aru189

Cited by 95 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pumas typically select smaller prey during periods when black bear Ursus americanus densities are high, and hence the risk of kleptoparasitism is greater (Elbroch et al . ). Leopards may likewise be expected to select smaller prey in areas with high densities of hyaenas, or other sympatric competitors that cannot climb trees (e.g., wolves Canis lupus , dholes Cuon alpinus and striped hyaenas Hyaena hyaena in Asia).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…) to compensate for kills lost to competitors (Krofel, Kos & Jerina ; Elbroch et al . ), but ultimately they may still suffer a net loss of food (Krofel, Kos & Jerina ). Depending on the hunting approach employed by predators, as well as the relative abundance of prey, this increase in energetic demands may compromise individual survival, and even threaten population persistence (Gorman et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Caching reduces kleptoparasitism in a solitary, large felid

Balme

Miller

Pitman

et al. 2017

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food caching is a common strategy used by a diversity of animals, including carnivores, to store and/or secure food. Despite its prevalence, the drivers of caching behaviour, and its impacts on individuals, remain poorly understood, particularly for short-term food cachers. Leopards Panthera pardus exhibit a unique form of short-term food caching, regularly hoisting, storing and consuming prey in trees. We explored the factors motivating such behaviour among leopards in the Sabi Sand Game Reserve, South Africa, associated with four not mutually exclusive hypotheses: food-perishability, consumption-time, resource-pulse and kleptoparasitism-avoidance. Using data from 2032 prey items killed by 104 leopards from 2013 to 2015, we built generalized linear mixed models to examine how hoisting behaviour, feeding time and the likelihood of a kill being kleptoparasitized varied with leopard sex and age, prey size and vulnerability, vegetation, elevation, climate, and the immediate and long-term risk posed by dominant competitors. Leopards hoisted 51% of kills. They were more likely to hoist kills of an intermediate size, outside of a resource pulse and in response to the presence of some competitors. Hoisted kills were also fed on for longer than non-hoisted kills. At least 21% of kills were kleptoparasitized, mainly by spotted hyaenas Crocuta crocuta. Kills were more likely to be kleptoparasitized at lower temperatures and if prey were larger, not hoisted, and in areas where the risk of encountering hyaenas was greatest. Female leopards that suffered higher rates of kleptoparasitism exhibited lower annual reproductive success than females that lost fewer kills. Our results strongly support the kleptoparasitism-avoidance hypothesis and suggest hoisting is a key adaptation that enables leopards to coexist sympatrically with high densities of competitors. We further argue that leopards may select smaller-sized prey than predicted by optimal foraging theory, to balance trade-offs between kleptoparasitic losses and the energetic gains derived from killing larger prey. Although caching may provide the added benefits of delaying food perishability and enabling consumption over an extended period, the behaviour primarily appears to be a strategy for leopards, and possibly other short-term cachers, to reduce the risks of kleptoparasitism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Caching reduces kleptoparasitism in a solitary, large felid

Balme

Miller

Pitman

et al. 2017

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…50% of mountain lion (Puma concolor) kills (Elbroch et al 2015). Conversely, additional protein obtained from scavenging kills may increase bear fitness, and wolf kills are particularly important for bears in late winter and early spring (Ballard et al 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, the effects of predation can be better understood within a whole-community context that takes interactions into account (Elmhagen et al 2010, Letnic et al 2011, Elbroch et al 2015. For instance, wolves provide biomass to scavengers throughout the year (Wilmers et al 2003, Wikenros et al 2013, and they also drive changes in the density, distribution, and diet of other predators (Berger andGese 2007, Kortello et al 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wolves, people, and brown bears influence the expansion of the recolonizing wolf population in Scandinavia

Ordiz

Milleret²,

Kindberg

et al. 2015

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Interspecific competition can influence the distribution and abundance of species and the structure of ecological communities and entire ecosystems. Interactions between apex predators can have cascading effects through the entire natural community, which supports broadening the scope of conservation from single species to a much wider ecosystem perspective. However, competition between wild large carnivores can hardly be measured experimentally. In this study, we analyzed the expansion of the Scandinavian wolf (Canis lupus) population during its recovery from the early 1990s. We took into account wolf-, habitat-, human-and brown bear (Ursus arctos)-related factors, because wolf expansion occurred within an area partially sympatric with bears. Wolf pair establishment was positively related to previous wolf presence and was negatively related to road density, distance to other wolf territories, and bear density. These findings suggest that both human-related habitat modification and interspecific competition have been influential factors modulating the expansion of the wolf population. Interactions between large carnivores have the potential to affect overall biodiversity. Therefore, conservation-oriented management of such species should consider interspecific interactions, rather than focusing only on target populations of single species. Long-term monitoring data across large areas should also help quantify and predict the influence of biotic interactions on species assemblages and distributions elsewhere. This is important because interactive processes can be essential in the regulation, stability, and resilience of ecological communities.

show abstract

“…), because prolonged prey consumption makes solitary predators more susceptible to kleptoparasites (Krofel, Kos & Jerina ; Elbroch & Wittmer ; Elbroch et al . ). Furthermore, their hunting success depends less on the seasonal vulnerability of prey (Pereira, Owen‐Smith & Moleón ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Puma predation subsidizes an obligate scavenger in the high Andes

Perrig

Donadío

Middleton

et al. 2016

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary The ungulate–carnivore–vulture complex is a key trophic module of many terrestrial ecosystems, but one that is globally under threat. Few have explored cross‐species dependencies in this module, and the degree to which vultures rely on trophic facilitation by apex carnivores is rarely known and almost never quantified. We investigated the importance of puma Puma concolor predation on its native camelid prey, vicuñas Vicugna vicugna and guanacos Lama guanicoe, in food provisioning for Andean condors Vultur gryphus in the high Andes of north‐western Argentina. We evaluated the origin of wild food sources through carcass surveys. We quantified condor feeding habits via foraging observations and through the analysis of pellet contents and stable isotopes from moulted feathers. Of the 102 fresh camelid carcasses we monitored, nearly all (94%) resulted from puma predation, and the majority (85%) of camelid carcasses used by condors were killed by pumas. Camelids represented 88% of the prey items identified from 183 condor pellets, and isotopic analyses of moulted feathers from 86 individuals identified via multilocus genotyping revealed that camelids and Small livestock were the most important prey items, representing 45–58% and 28–38% of condor assimilated biomass, respectively. Synthesis and applications. Our results show that puma predation plays a key role in the foraging ecology of Andean condors, and highlight the importance of predatory processes that make carrion available to scavengers. We contend that targeting the conservation of ungulate–carnivore–vulture modules, rather than a species‐specific approach, will be a more effective strategy to ensure the long‐term persistence of Andean condors and other obligate scavengers.

show abstract

Nowhere to hide: pumas, black bears, and competition refuges

Cited by 95 publications

References 34 publications

Caching reduces kleptoparasitism in a solitary, large felid

Caching reduces kleptoparasitism in a solitary, large felid

Wolves, people, and brown bears influence the expansion of the recolonizing wolf population in Scandinavia

Puma predation subsidizes an obligate scavenger in the high Andes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About