Antipredatory Response and Food Intake in Wood Mice (Apodemus sylvaticus) under Simulated Predation Risk by Resident and Novel Carnivorous Predators

Abstract

Chemical signals left by predators are a potential source of information about the risk of predation, and small mammals are known to take them into account when making decisions. We investigated whether wood mice (Apodemus sylvaticus) are more likely to avoid the faeces of resident predators (red fox Vulpes vulpes and common genet Genetta genetta) vs. a novel predator (European pine marten Martes martes). Odour recognition would increase perceived predation risk and reduce food intake by individual mice. Wood mice response to predators was analysed by live‐trapping using two untreated controls (baited/non‐baited) and traps experimentally manipulated with three predator treatments (faeces of red fox, common genet or pine marten). Traps were baited with 4 g of toasted corn, and food intake by wood mice was determined as the amount of bait remaining in each trap. We found that traps treated with faeces of resident predators were the most avoided, and the number of captures in traps treated with pine marten faeces was similar to the control‐baited traps. The variation found in food intake was explained by the interaction between the types of treatment and breeding condition. Food intake was similar in control‐baited traps and in traps with faeces of pine marten, but when predation risk by resident predators (red fox and common genet) was simulated, breeders reduced food intake significantly as compared to non‐breeders. These results indicate that predator recognition and feeding behaviour under predation risk depend on individual factors and the balance of costs‐benefits in each particular predation risk situation at a given place and time.

Wood mice aggressiveness and flight response to human handling: Effect of individual and environmental factors

“…On the other hand, in summer months, mice become an essential element of the pine marten ( Martes martes ) diets (Rosellini, Barja, & Piñeiro, ; Rosellini, Barja et al., ; Rosellini, Osoria et al., ). Therefore, being the main prey of numerous predators implies that they have to adapt their behaviour to each particular situation, evaluating predation risk in order to perform the most suitable response (Navarro‐Castilla & Barja, ,b). Consequently, due to the influence of predation pressure, individuals seem to show conspicuously aggressive behaviour when they are intensely pursued.…”

“…In nature, animals must cope with a broad array of threats in order to survive and, among them, disturbance by humans poses crucial trade‐offs for wildlife populations. Direct and indirect impacts of anthropogenic interference cause wide‐ranging effects on wildlife affecting not only their ecology and, hence, population densities, but also shaping their behaviour and physiology (Barja et al., ; Borkowski et al., ; Davies, Haddad, & Ouyang, ; Fernández‐Juricic & Tellería, ; Johnson, Boyce, Schwartz, & Haroldson, ; Navarro‐Castilla & Barja, ,b; Stankowich, ). Several measures for evaluating human‐caused effects on wild populations have been used (Tarlow & Blumstein, ), but behavioural changes have been often considered the most sensitive measure of animal′s susceptibity to human effects.…”

“…The same as predators, detection of humans by wildlife is based on visual, auditory and olfactory signals and prey species have developed antipredatory responses to generalized hazardous stimuli such as strident noises or swiftly approaching objects (Dill, ,b). Behavioural adaptations appear to be the most frequent antipredatory responses (Apfelbach, Blanchard, Blanchard, Hayes, & McGregor, ) and can be considered primary strategies (Caro, ; Ferrari, ; Kavaliers & Choleris, ) as they reduce risk exposure to potential dangerous situations (Gallego et al., ; Navarro‐Castilla & Barja, ,b; Navarro‐Castilla, Barja, & Díaz, ; Sánchez‐González, Barja, & Navarro‐Castilla, ). Additionally, along with risk assessment, prey species can display an array of specific defensive behaviours as the ultimate protection to thwart initiated attacks.…”

Predicting forest management effects on oak–rodent mutualisms

“…The same applies to rodents (Banks et al , Haapokoski et al ). In particular, wood mice are known to avoid areas frequented by predators (Díaz et al , Navarro‐Castilla and Barja ) as well as open microhabitats (Muñoz et al , Perea et al ). In fact, studies monitoring individual movements have found that home ranges shrink when exposure to predation increases (Tew and Macdonald , Tattersall et al ).…”

Wild American crows gather around their dead to learn about danger

“…Crows' ability to tailor their immediate response to the identity of the threat is supported by studies showing that animals such as breeding wood mice, Apodemus sylvaticus, and blue jays, Cyanocitta cristata, adjust subsequent foraging decisions to predator identity (Conover, 1979;Navarro-Castilla & Barja, 2013). That crows responded most strongly to a predator with a conspecific prey is consistent with a previous study on crows (Barash, 1976) and with responses by herring gulls, Larus argentatus, and lesser blackbacked gulls, Larus fuscus (Kruuk, 1976).…”