The role of habituation in the adjustment to urban life: An experimental approach with burrowing owls

Cavalli, Matilde; Baladrón, Alejandro V.; Isacch, Juan Pablo; Biondi, L.; Bo, Marco

doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2018.10.011

Cited by 29 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…rufus, coyote Canis latrans, mule deer Odocoileus hemionus or wild boar Sus scrofa, the most common behavioral response is to adjust the circadian rhythm to avoid people (George and Crooks 2006;Podgórski et al 2013;Gaynor et al 2018). In the case of birds or mammals whose daytime patterns of activity coincides with the human activity, the avoidance of people is not temporal but spatial and is based on keeping a safe distance in space (Atwell et al 2012;Bateman and Fleming 2014;Cavalli et al 2018;Mikula et al 2018;Uchida et al 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in the social behavior of urban animals: more aggression or tolerance?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral traits play a major role in successful adaptation of wildlife to urban conditions. However, there are few studies showing how urban conditions affect the social behavior of urban animals during their direct encounters. It is generally believed that the higher density of urban populations translates into increased aggression between individuals. In this paper, using a camera-trap method, we compared the character of direct encounters in urban and non-urban populations of the striped field mouse Apodemus agrarius (Pallas, 1771), a species known as an urban adapter. We confirmed the thesis that urbanization affects the social behavior and urban and rural populations differ from each other. Urban animals are less likely to avoid close contact with each other and are more likely to show tolerant behavior. They also have a lower tendency towards monopolization of food resources. The behavior of urban animals varies depending on the time of day: in the daytime, animals are more vigilant and less tolerant than at night. Our results indicate that, in the case of the species studied, behavioral adaptation to urban life is based on increasing tolerance rather than aggression in social relations. However, the studied urban adapter retains the high plasticity of social behavior revealed even in the circadian cycle. The observation that tolerance rather than aggression may predominate in urban populations is a new finding, while most studies suggest an increase in aggression in urban animals. This opens an avenue for formulating new hypotheses regarding the social behavior of urban adapters.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in the social behavior of urban animals: more aggression or tolerance?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, in some towns, such as Puerto Baquizo Moreno on San Cristobal and Puerto Ayora on Santa Cruz, FID has been reduced to levels below what was observed on islands with no history of invasive predators. Such reductions in FID in urban finches are likely due initially to habituation (Blumstein, Fernandez‐Juricic, Zollner, & Garity, ; Cavalli, Baladrón, Isacch, Biondi, & Bó, ; Møller, ; Samia, Nakagawa, Nomura, Rangel, & Blumstein, ) which can lead to lower FID being an evolved adaptation (van Dongen, Robinson, Weston, Mulder, & Guay, ) This suggests pressures from urbanization on antipredator behaviour can be so strong that it results in FID lower than the baseline FID quantified on pristine islands, counteracting any increase in FID due to the presence of invasive predators. For both this and the previous point, more research needs to be conducted on more systems with towns of varying sizes given the relatively small number of islands and populations in this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human influences on antipredator behaviour in Darwin’s finches

Gotanda

2019

Journal of Animal Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans exert dramatic influences upon the environment, creating novel selective pressures to which organisms must adapt. On the Galapagos, humans have established a permanent presence and have altered selective pressures through influences such as invasive predators and urbanization, affecting iconic species such as Darwin's finches. Here, I ask two key questions: (a) Does antipredator behaviour (e.g., flight initiation distance – FID) change depending on whether invasive predators are historically absent, present, or eradicated? and (b) To what degree does urbanization affect antipredator behaviour? This study is one of the first to quantify antipredator behaviour in endemic species after the eradication of invasive predators. This will help to understand the consequences of invasive predator eradication and inform conservation measures. I quantified FID, an antipredator behaviour, in the small ground finch, across multiple islands in the Galapagos that varied in the presence, absence, or successful eradication of invasive predators. On islands with human populations, I quantified FID in urban and non‐urban populations of finches. FID was higher on islands with invasive predators compared to islands with no predators. On islands from which invasive predators were eradicated ~11 years previously, FID was also higher than on islands with no invasive predators. Within islands that had both urban and non‐urban populations of finches, FID was lower in urban finch populations, but only above a threshold human population size. FID in larger urban areas on islands with invasive predators was similar to or lower than FID on islands with no history of invasive predators. Overall, these results suggest that invasive predators can have a lasting effect on antipredator behaviour, even after eradication. Furthermore, the effect of urbanization can strongly oppose the effect of invasive predators, reducing antipredator behaviour to levels lower than found on pristine islands with no human influences. These results improve our understanding of human influences on antipredator behaviour which can help inform future conservation and management efforts on islands.

show abstract

“…In other words, in some 267 towns, such as Puerto Baquizo Moreno on San Cristobal, FID has been reduced to levels below 268 what was observed on islands with no history of invasive predators. Such reductions in FID in 269 urban finches is likely due to habituation [64][65][66][67] , ) suggesting that habituation from urbanization is 270 so strong that it results in FID lower than the baseline FID quantified on pristine islands, 271 counteracting any increase in FID due to the presence of invasive predators. This suggests that 272 the effects of urbanization on organisms can be quite strong, with likely evolutionary and 273 ecological consequences 3,4,68 .…”

Section: Increased Antipredator Behaviour Is Maintained After Eradicamentioning

confidence: 99%

Human influences on antipredator behaviour in Darwin’s finches

Gotanda

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1In the Galapagos, humans have established a permanent presence and have altered selective 2 pressures on local and endemic species through influences such as invasive predators and 3 urbanization. I quantified flight initiation distance (FID), an antipredator behaviour in Darwin's 4 finches, across multiple islands in the Galapagos to address two questions: (i) does antipredator 5 behaviour change in the presence of invasive predators and importantly, what happens once 6 invasive predators have been eradicated and (ii) to what degree does urbanization affect 7 antipredator behaviour? The Galapagos Islands offers a system of among island differences in 8 invasive predator regime as well as degree of urbanization presenting an opportune place to 9 answer these two questions. Furthermore, this is one of the first studies to look at behaviour in an 10 endemic species after successful eradication of invasive predators. FID was higher on islands 11 with invasive predators as compared to islands with no predators. On islands from which 12 invasive predators were eradicated ~11 years previously, FID was also higher than on islands 13 with no invasive predators. Within islands that had both urban and non-urban populations of 14 finches, FID was lower in urban finch populations, but only above a threshold human population 15 size. FID in larger urban areas on islands with invasive predators was similar to or lower than 16 FID on islands with no history of invasive predators. Overall, these results suggest that for 17 antipredator behaviour, invasive predators can have a lasting effect on antipredator behaviour, 18 even after eradication, and that the effect of urbanization can strongly oppose the effect of 19 invasive predators, reducing antipredator behaviour to levels lower than found on pristine islands 20 with no human influences. Together, we can begin to understand how human influences are 21 affecting antipredator behaviour which could help inform future conservation and management 22 efforts on islands. 23

show abstract

The role of habituation in the adjustment to urban life: An experimental approach with burrowing owls

Cited by 29 publications

References 46 publications

Changes in the social behavior of urban animals: more aggression or tolerance?

Changes in the social behavior of urban animals: more aggression or tolerance?

Human influences on antipredator behaviour in Darwin’s finches

Human influences on antipredator behaviour in Darwin’s finches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About