Cheetahs modify their prey handling behavior depending on risks from top predators

Hilborn, Anne; Pettorelli, Nathalie; Caro, Timothy; Kelly, Marcella J.; Laurenson, M. Karen; Durant, Sarah M.

doi:10.1007/s00265-018-2481-y

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While many large carnivores provide leftovers to scavengers, some large carnivores are more takers than givers, stealing kills from smaller carnivores rather than (or in addition to) providing them. For some mid‐ranked carnivores such as cheetahs and leopards, avoidance of kleptoparisitism is a driving force in their ecology (Durant 2000b; Scantlebury et al 2014; Balme et al 2017; Hilborn et al 2018). Kleptoparasitism has primarily been examined within east African carnivore communities; 7 of the 12 studies in our analysis occurred in Africa.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enemies with benefits: integrating positive and negative interactions among terrestrial carnivores

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interactions among terrestrial carnivores involve a complex interplay of competition, predation and facilitation via carrion provisioning, and these negative and positive pathways may be closely linked. Here, we developed an integrative framework and synthesized data from 256 studies of intraguild predation, scavenging, kleptoparisitism and resource availability to examine global patterns of suppression and facilitation. Large carnivores were responsible for one third of mesocarnivore mortality (n = 1,581 individuals), and intraguild mortality rates were superadditive, increasing from 10.6% to 25.5% in systems with two vs. three large carnivores. Scavenged ungulates comprised 30% of mesocarnivore diets, with larger mesocarnivores relying most heavily on carrion. Large carnivores provided 1,351 kg of carrion per individual per year to scavengers, and this subsidy decreased at higher latitudes. However, reliance on carrion by mesocarnivores remained high, and abundance correlations among sympatric carnivores were more negative in these stressful, high-latitude systems. Carrion provisioning by large carnivores may therefore enhance suppression rather than benefiting mesocarnivores. These findings highlight the synergistic effects of scavenging and predation risk in structuring carnivore communities, suggesting that the ecosystem service of mesocarnivore suppression provided by large carnivores is strong and not easily replaced by humans.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enemies with benefits: integrating positive and negative interactions among terrestrial carnivores

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More broadly, dominant carnivores often, but not always, tend to limit subordinate carnivore abundance 3 . Where demographic or landscape-scale carnivore competitive responses are unexpectedly absent, short-term behavioral responses may be a mechanism facilitating coexistence 50 . Though many studies of vigilance have focused on herbivorous prey 51 – 55 , vigilance may also be an important risk response to intraguild predators and competing carnivore species 23 , 56 , 57 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

American martens use vigilance and short-term avoidance to navigate a landscape of fear from fishers at artificial scavenging sites

Kautz

Beyer

Farley

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Where two sympatric species compete for the same resource and one species is dominant, there is potential for the subordinate species to be affected through interference competition or energetic costs of avoiding predation. Fishers (Pekania pennanti) and American martens (Martes americana) often have high niche overlap, but fishers are considered dominant and potentially limiting to martens. We observed presence and vigilance of fishers and martens at winter carcass sites using remote cameras in Michigan, USA, to test the hypothesis that interference competition from fishers creates a landscape of fear for martens. Within winters, fishers co-occupied 78–88% of sites occupied by martens, and martens co-occupied 79–88% of sites occupied by fishers. Fishers displaced martens from carcasses during 21 of 6117 marten visits, while martens displaced fishers during 0 of 1359 fisher visits. Martens did not alter diel activity in response to fisher use of sites. Martens allocated 37% of time to vigilance compared to 23% for fishers, and martens increased vigilance up to 8% at sites previously visited by fishers. Fishers increased vigilance by up to 8% at sites previously visited by martens. Our results indicate that fishers were dominant over martens, and martens had greater baseline perception of risk than fishers. However, fishers appeared to be also affected as the dominant competitor by putting effort into scanning for martens. Both species appeared widespread and common in our study area, but there was no evidence that fishers spatially or temporally excluded martens from scavenging at carcasses other than occasional short-term displacement when a fisher was present. Instead, martens appeared to mitigate risk from fishers by using vigilance and short-term avoidance. Multiple short-term anti-predator behaviors within a landscape of fear may facilitate coexistence among carnivore species.

show abstract

“…The food-web topology in our model resembles that observed in nature; thus, we are able to match our assumptions and predictions with many empirical examples. Most interspecific interactions are asymmetric, with one species more likely to gain access to and stay at a carcass, for example, lynx and wolverines and in wolves (Tallian et al, 2017) or solitary cats (Hilborn et al, 2018) and ursids (Krofel et al, 2012). The interaction between lions and hyenas is perhaps the only approximately symmetrical interaction.…”

Section: Comparison To Empirical Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Per-capita prey killed by predators per predator is constant with scavengers (Figure A8) with a similar small effect of n P on predator kill rate. We include handling time of the carrion by the predator h CP in the equation for scavenging propensity by the predator s P though because we expect predators to generally behave adaptively (Hilborn et al, 2018). Recall the equation for , thus handling time of the predator affects the scavenging rate, which, also affects kill rate.…”

Section: A 4 3 | M O D E L With N O Dy N a M I C Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of scavenging on predation in a food web

Mellard

Hamel

Henden

et al. 2021

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Cheetahs modify their prey handling behavior depending on risks from top predators

Abstract: Borner and others at FZS, as well as T. Mariki. AH thanks Ulrike Hilborn for data entry and general support and Ray Hilborn for help with R. We also thank Dr. Matt Hayward and an anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments.

Cited by 18 publications

References 53 publications

Enemies with benefits: integrating positive and negative interactions among terrestrial carnivores

Enemies with benefits: integrating positive and negative interactions among terrestrial carnivores

American martens use vigilance and short-term avoidance to navigate a landscape of fear from fishers at artificial scavenging sites

Effect of scavenging on predation in a food web

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About