Why are predator urines aversive to prey?

Nolte, Dale L.; Mason, J M; Epple, Gisela; Aronov, Evgueny V.; Campbell, Dan L.

doi:10.1007/bf02059876

Cited by 207 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

140

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar effects have been shown in a number of studies with other prey species: beavers, black-tailed deer, snowshoe hares, deer mice, guinea pigs, house mice, gray squirrels, meadow voles, and mountain voles during exposure to coyote, wolf, fox, and bobcat urine (Sullivan et al, 1985a(Sullivan et al, ,b, 1988Epple et al, 1993;Nolte et al, 1994;Swihart et al, 1999;Rosell, 2001), and, most relevantly, in rats during exposure to fox urine (Burwash et al, 1998;Campbell et al, 2003;Farmer-Dougan et al, 2005). The results of all these studies were confirmed here.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Exposure to Urine of Canids and Felids, but not of Herbivores, Induces Defensive Behavior in Laboratory Rats

Fendt

2006

J Chem Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predator odors induce defensive behavior in many prey species. For various reasons, studies carried out up to now have been unable to establish whether predator odor recognition is innate or not. Mostly, only particular odors or wild-living (i.e., experienced) test animals have been used in these studies, restricting the conclusiveness of the observations. In the present study, the behavioral effects of exposure to different predator odors on predator odor-naive laboratory male rats were compared with the effects of different nonpredator odors and of a no-odor control stimulus. Results show that exposure to urine of canids and felids, but not of herbivores or conspecifics, induce defensive behaviors. Taken together, the study provides support for the hypothesis that there is an innate recognition of predator odors in laboratory rats.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Exposure to Urine of Canids and Felids, but not of Herbivores, Induces Defensive Behavior in Laboratory Rats

Fendt

2006

J Chem Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, it has been hypothesized that the sulphurous metabolites of meat digestion are important for the repellency of predator urine and faecal odours to potential prey (Nolte et al, 1994), and primates have been shown to actively avoid such odours (Sündermann et al, 2005). Taken together, these findings strongly support the notion that indols and thiols should be of high behavioural relevance for non-human primates.…”

Section: The Journal Of Experimental Biologymentioning

confidence: 61%

Olfactory sensitivity for putrefaction-associated thiols and indols in three species of non-human primate

Laska

Bautista

Höfelmann

et al. 2007

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Using a conditioning paradigm, the olfactory sensitivity of four spider monkeys, three squirrel monkeys and three pigtail macaques to four thiols and two indols, substances characteristic of putrefaction processes and faecal odours, was assessed. With all odorants, the animals significantly discriminated concentrations below 1 p.p.m. (part per million) from the odourless solvent, and in several cases individual animals even demonstrated thresholds below 1 p.p.t. (part per trillion). The detection thresholds of 0.03 p.p.t. for indol in Saimiri sciureus and Macaca nemestrina and 0.96 p.p.t. for ethanethiol in Ateles geoffroyirepresent the lowest values among the more than 50 odorants tested so far with these species and are in the same order of magnitude as the lowest detection thresholds reported so far in the rat and the mouse. The results showed (a)all three species of non-human primate to have a highly developed olfactory sensitivity for putrefaction-associated odorants, and (b) a significant correlation between perceptibility in terms of olfactory detection threshold and carbon chain length of the thiols, and a marked effect of the presence vs absence of a methyl group on perceptibility of the indols tested in two of the three species. The results support the hypotheses that (a)between-species differences in neuroanatomical or genetic features may not be indicative of olfactory sensitivity, and (b) within-species differences in olfactory sensitivity may reflect differences in the behavioural relevance of odorants.

show abstract

“…These molecules are often the only warning a prey has that a predator is nearby. They include a class of heterocyclic sulfur or nitrogencontaining compounds generated by meat digestion (47). To these belongs 2,4,5-trimethylthiazoline (TMT), a component of fox (Vulpes vulpes) feces (48) that is well known for its fear-inducing properties (49, 50), (Fig.…”

Section: Alarm Pheromones and Predator Scents Sharing A Common Chemicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mouse alarm pheromone shares structural similarity with predator scents

Brechbühl

Moine

Klaey

et al. 2013

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

157

234

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensing the chemical warnings present in the environment is essential for species survival. In mammals, this form of danger communication occurs via the release of natural predator scents that can involuntarily warn the prey or by the production of alarm pheromones by the stressed prey alerting its conspecifics. Although we previously identified the olfactory Grueneberg ganglion as the sensory organ through which mammalian alarm pheromones signal a threatening situation, the chemical nature of these cues remains elusive. We here identify, through chemical analysis in combination with a series of physiological and behavioral tests, the chemical structure of a mouse alarm pheromone. To successfully recognize the volatile cues that signal danger, we based our selection on their activation of the mouse olfactory Grueneberg ganglion and the concomitant display of innate fear reactions. Interestingly, we found that the chemical structure of the identified mouse alarm pheromone has similar features as the sulfur-containing volatiles that are released by predating carnivores. Our findings thus not only reveal a chemical Leitmotiv that underlies signaling of fear, but also point to a double role for the olfactory Grueneberg ganglion in intraspecies as well as interspecies communication of danger.olfaction | animal communication | behavior | calcium imaging

show abstract

Why are predator urines aversive to prey?

Cited by 207 publications

References 23 publications

Exposure to Urine of Canids and Felids, but not of Herbivores, Induces Defensive Behavior in Laboratory Rats

Exposure to Urine of Canids and Felids, but not of Herbivores, Induces Defensive Behavior in Laboratory Rats

Olfactory sensitivity for putrefaction-associated thiols and indols in three species of non-human primate

Mouse alarm pheromone shares structural similarity with predator scents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About