2016
DOI: 10.1002/ecy.1462
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The importance of motivation, weapons, and foul odors in driving encounter competition in carnivores

Abstract: Abstract. Encounter competition is interference competition in which animals directly contend for resources. Ecological theory predicts the trait that determines the resource holding potential (RHP), and hence the winner of encounter competition, is most often body size or mass. The difficulties of observing encounter competition in complex organisms in natural environments, however, has limited opportunities to test this theory across diverse species. We studied the outcome of encounter competition contests a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
38
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
(62 reference statements)
2
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, baits are likely to bias the identity and relative numbers of different species recorded by cameras because they favour those species that respond more strongly to the chosen bait (Lazenby et al 2015). The number of species recorded by remote cameras is also likely to be influenced by species interactions at and around the bait (Allen et al 2016b). Based on our results, monitoring schemes targeting single species or species at low densities might consider baiting the camera traps to minimise trapping effort and costs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, baits are likely to bias the identity and relative numbers of different species recorded by cameras because they favour those species that respond more strongly to the chosen bait (Lazenby et al 2015). The number of species recorded by remote cameras is also likely to be influenced by species interactions at and around the bait (Allen et al 2016b). Based on our results, monitoring schemes targeting single species or species at low densities might consider baiting the camera traps to minimise trapping effort and costs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, other sources of variation (e.g. weather or species behaviour) might influence the probability of detection of cameras and tracking tunnels (Gillies & Williams 2013;Allen et al 2016b;Fancourt 2016). Further research on the interactions among animals, their environment and monitoring devices is required to minimise the number of misdetections (Meek et al 2016) and to develop new standards.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Canis lupus hodophilax who became extinct in the early 20th century There may be some perceived risk from competition with other scavengers (e.g., Allen, Wilmers, Elbroch, Golla, & Wittmer, 2016;Hunter, Durant, & Caro, 2007;Pereira et al, 2014). For example, some species (especially red foxes, Japanese martens, and jungle crows) visited the carcasses but often did not scavenge from them, and red foxes and martens fed less than bears and raccoon dogs.…”
Section: Scavenger Frequency and Durationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A common assumption is that grizzly bears will dominate in direct competitions with black bears because adult grizzlies typically are larger and more aggressive than black bears. While there are empirical examples of this (Gunther et al 2002), recent studies exploring interference competition have found exceptions to this assumption, with the outcome having more to do with motivation and perception of risk than body size (Miller et al 2015, Allen et al 2016). Actual encounter rates, their outcome, and effects on emergent properties (Salt 1979) like density have not been thoroughly evaluated for either species (Mattson et al 2005, Schwartz et al 2010.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%