Implications of shared predation for space use in two sympatric leporids

Weterings, Martijn; Ewert, Sophie P.; Peereboom, Jeffrey N.; Kuipers, H.; Kuijper, Dries P. J.; Prins, Herbert H. T.; Jansen, Patrick A.; Langevelde, Frank van; Wieren, S.E. van

doi:10.1002/ece3.4980

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 87 publications

(196 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interspecific competition occurs when two or more species share scarce resources resulting in negative effects on physiology, growth, and survival of at least one of them [ 80 , 81 ]. Dietary overlap has been reported between ungulates and lagomorphs [ 54 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 ], with the latter often forced by larger herbivores to use suboptimal areas [ 84 ]. The roe deer was the only cervid occurring in our study area, apart from the rare fallow deer Dama dama [ 59 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The European brown hare evolved in predator-rich ecosystems, including a rich community of native and introduced mesocarnivores, as well as with several potential competitors, particularly in Europe [ 84 , 85 ]. In Italy, where our research was conducted, the hare is reported as a prey species for a large number of small and medium-sized carnivores including at least eight mustelids, four canids, and two felid species [ 30 , 86 ], as well as a potential competitor of several species of ungulates and lagomorphs [ 87 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatiotemporal Overlap between the European Brown Hare and Its Potential Predators and Competitors

Viviano

Mori

Fattorini

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis of spatiotemporal partitioning is pivotal to shed light on interspecific coexistence. Most research effort has involved large-sized carnivores and their prey, whereas little attention has been devoted to lagomorphs. We assessed spatiotemporal overlap among the European brown hare Lepus europaeus and its potential competitors and predators through camera-trapping in an area in Central Italy. We estimated the interspecific patterns of the spatiotemporal activity rhythms of brown hares, its potential predators (the red fox Vulpes vulpes, the pine marten Martes martes, the domestic cat Felis catus, and the domestic dog Canis familiaris), and a competitor, the roe deer Capreolus capreolus. Brown hare activity was studied in natural conditions as well as in a fenced area that excluded terrestrial predators and competitors. Free-ranging hares developed a more nocturnal behavior to avoid diurnal predators (i.e., domestic carnivores and martens). Although high temporal overlap was observed between free-ranging brown hares and both red foxes (82%) and roe deer (81%), hares avoided fox by being more active on darkest nights, as well as avoided roe deer through spatial partitioning. We suggest that hares may adapt their spatiotemporal behavior to avoid potential predators and competitors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal Overlap between the European Brown Hare and Its Potential Predators and Competitors

Viviano

Mori

Fattorini

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Astete et al., 2016; Rich et al., 2017; Rota et al., 2016). Spatial interactions between predator and prey have been examined using stratified random or systematic deployment of multiple cameras, which allows for detailed analyses of patterns of avoidance, association, co‐occurrence and fine‐scale space use (Rota et al., 2016; Weterings et al., 2019). Camera traps have also been implemented to examine how predators and prey partition time (Frey et al., 2017) and to quantify the degree of temporal overlap between two species (Ridout & Linkie, 2009) over daily (Monterroso, Alves, & Ferreras, 2013), monthly (e.g.…”

Section: Observational Applications Of Camera Traps To Predator–prey mentioning

confidence: 99%

Zooming in on mechanistic predator–prey ecology: Integrating camera traps with experimental methods to reveal the drivers of ecological interactions

Smith

Suraci

Hunter

et al. 2020

Journal of Animal Ecology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Camera trap technology has galvanized the study of predator–prey ecology in wild animal communities by expanding the scale and diversity of predator–prey interactions that can be analysed. While observational data from systematic camera arrays have informed inferences on the spatiotemporal outcomes of predator–prey interactions, the capacity for observational studies to identify mechanistic drivers of species interactions is limited. Experimental study designs that utilize camera traps uniquely allow for testing hypothesized mechanisms that drive predator and prey behaviour, incorporating environmental realism not possible in the laboratory while benefiting from the distinct capacity of camera traps to generate large datasets from multiple species with minimal observer interference. However, such pairings of camera traps with experimental methods remain underutilized. We review recent advances in the experimental application of camera traps to investigate fundamental mechanisms underlying predator–prey ecology and present a conceptual guide for designing experimental camera trap studies. Only 9% of camera trap studies on predator–prey ecology in our review use experimental methods, but the application of experimental approaches is increasing. To illustrate the utility of camera trap‐based experiments using a case study, we propose a study design that integrates observational and experimental techniques to test a perennial question in predator–prey ecology: how prey balance foraging and safety, as formalized by the risk allocation hypothesis. We discuss applications of camera trap‐based experiments to evaluate the diversity of anthropogenic influences on wildlife communities globally. Finally, we review challenges to conducting experimental camera trap studies. Experimental camera trap studies have already begun to play an important role in understanding the predator–prey ecology of free‐living animals, and such methods will become increasingly critical to quantifying drivers of community interactions in a rapidly changing world. We recommend increased application of experimental methods in the study of predator and prey responses to humans, synanthropic and invasive species, and other anthropogenic disturbances.

show abstract

“…As for most herbivorous mammals, the trade‐off between predator avoidance (e.g. Knauer et al 2010, Zaccaroni et al 2012, Weterings et al 2016, 2019, Mayer et al 2020b) and access to high‐quality food resources (Weterings et al 2018) may underlie spatiotemporal adaptations in this lagomorph. Although we confirm that the hare is an open area and farmland specialist, the proportional use of most habitat types and seasonal modulations in activity suggests considerable plasticity in its use of space and time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting spatiotemporal behaviour in the European brown hareLepus europaeus: a meta‐analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. The European brown hare Lepus europaeus is the most widely distributed hare species of the world, being naturally present throughout Eurasia and introduced as a game species in most continents. Despite the importance of this lagomorph for both management and conservation, a quantitative summary of its spatiotemporal behaviour is still lacking. 2. Taking advantage of 51 selected studies conducted throughout the native range of the hare and spanning the last 40 years, we used meta-analytic approaches in order to: 1) investigate home range size in relation to ecological factors; 2) test preference across major habitat types; and 3) provide a quantitative synthesis of hare activity patterns. 3. Temporally adjusted home range size of hare populations decreased with increasing cropland cover (cereal and non-cereal crops), suggesting that home range size gets smaller with increasing food availability, and predicting that hare populations living in absence of crops would double their mean home range size compared to those inhabiting areas covered entirely by cropland.Hare populations where more males were sampled showed larger home ranges, in line with the polygynous mating system of this species. 4. Hares preferred cropland and grassland over other habitats for foraging, thus selecting the two habitats characterised by the majority of trophic resources for this species. Yet, habitat types were used proportionally to their availability overall, except for the general avoidance of human settlements. Hares were mainly nocturnal, with the lowest activity during daytime, when activity was about one third of that at night, and showed moonlight avoidance, probably to limit encounters with nocturnal predators. Our work emphasises the importance of open habitats and especially croplandfor this lagomorph, but also suggests some plasticity in the use of space and time by hares. Such plasticity may help this mammal to cope with future environmental changes, providing that landscape heterogeneity is maintained.

show abstract

Implications of shared predation for space use in two sympatric leporids

Cited by 16 publications

References 87 publications

Spatiotemporal Overlap between the European Brown Hare and Its Potential Predators and Competitors

Spatiotemporal Overlap between the European Brown Hare and Its Potential Predators and Competitors

Zooming in on mechanistic predator–prey ecology: Integrating camera traps with experimental methods to reveal the drivers of ecological interactions

Factors affecting spatiotemporal behaviour in the European brown hareLepus europaeus: a meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About