Threading the needle: How humans influence predator–prey spatiotemporal interactions in a multiple‐predator system

Abstract

1. Perceived predation risk and the resulting antipredator behaviour varies across space, time and predator identity. Communities with multiple predators that interact and differ in their use of space, time of activity and hunting mode create a complex landscape for prey to avoid predation. Anthropogenic presence and disturbance have the potential to shift interactions among predators and prey and the where and when encounters occur.2. We examined how white-tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus fawn spatiotemporal antipredator behaviour differed along an anthropogenic disturbance gradient that had black bears Ursus americanus, coyotes Canis latrans, bobcats Lynx rufus and humans present.3. We quantified (a) spatial co-occurrence in species distributions, (b) temporal overlap across the diel cycle and (c) spatiotemporal associations between humans, bears, coyotes, bobcats, adult male deer and fawns. We also examined how deer vigilance behaviour changed across the anthropogenic disturbance gradient and survey duration. Anthropogenic disturbance influenced spatiotemporal co-occurrence across multiplescales, often increasing spatiotemporal overlap among species. In general, species' spatial co-occurrence was neutral or positive in anthropogenically disturbed environments. Bears and fawns, coyotes and adult male deer, and bobcats and fawns all had higher temporal overlap in the agriculture-development matrix sites. In addition, factors that influenced deer vigilance (e.g. distance to forest edge and predator relative abundance) in the agriculture-development matrix sites did not in the forest matrix site. 5. By taking into account the different antipredator behaviours that can be detected and the different scales these behaviours might occur, we were able to gain a more comprehensive picture of how humans reduce available niche space for wildlife, creating the neutral and positive spatiotemporal associations between species that studies have been seeing in more disturbed areas.

White‐tailed deer exploit temporal refuge from multi‐predator and human risks on roads

“…This hypothesis was supported in our study area by reduced fawn predation risk in areas with greater human development (Kautz, 2021 ). However, an interesting contrast to our results occurred in white‐tailed deer fawns in Pennsylvania, USA, where fawn‐predator temporal overlap was greater in a more developed landscape (Murphy et al, 2021 ).…”

“…We identified divergent diel activity patterns among deer age and sex classes, as found previously (Crawford et al, 2021 ; Higdon et al, 2019 ; Lashley et al, 2014 ; Murphy et al, 2021 ). Deer fawns in the southeastern United States increased diurnal activity compared with adult deer to avoid their primary predator, coyotes (Crawford et al, 2021 , Higdon et al, 2019 ).…”

“…Human activity may also impact deer diel risk through direct mortality where human and deer activity overlap (e.g., vehicle collisions) or indirectly if avoiding humans alters diel activity overlap between deer and predators (Gaynor et al, 2018 ; Patten et al, 2019 ). One study has examined diel activity of fawns and multiple predators, finding that human activity spatiotemporally compressed fawn and predator interactions as these species of wildlife were driven to converging places and times of refuge from humans (Murphy et al, 2021 ). This suggests that human activities may drive increased fawn predation, which is contrary to general trends of greater fawn mortality in more forested, less agricultural landscapes (Gingery et al, 2018 ).…”

The rhythm of the night: patterns of activity of the European wildcat in the Italian peninsula

“…Amongst mammals, the activity of predators is often synchronized with the activity of their prey (Daan and Aschoff 1981;Zielinski et al 1983;Monterroso et al 2013), or shaped by the need of avoidance of humans or other competitors (Wang et al 2015;Mori et al 2020b;Murphy et al 2021). As a matter of fact, nocturnal activity is one of the strategies that wildlife adopts to avoid encounters with humans (Gaynor et al 2018;Nickel et al 2020).…”

Predator–prey co‐occurrence in harvest blocks: Implications for caribou and forestry

“…Wildlife use of harvest blocks may also be influenced by landscape‐level characteristics including the surrounding habitat and density of anthropogenic disturbance (Kearney et al, 2019; Muhly et al, 2019) and the presence or absence of other wildlife species (Fisher & Ladle, 2022; Ladle et al, 2018; Rota et al, 2016). In the context of the natural and anthropogenic processes occurring within and around harvested areas, wildlife response to harvest blocks is likely influenced by both natural and anthropogenic factors at the site‐ and landscape scales (Kearney et al, 2019; Tomm et al, 1981), which may also influence the co‐occurrence of predator and prey species (Fisher & Ladle, 2022; Muhly et al, 2011; Murphy et al, 2021).…”