Literature DB >> 10373264

Assessment of rattlesnake dangerousness by California ground squirrels: exploitation of cues from rattling sounds.

.   

Abstract

We propose that the predator-prey relationship between California ground squirrels, Spermophilus beecheyi beecheyi, and northern Pacific rattlesnakes, Crotalus viridis oreganus, offers a compelling analogy with the well-studied case of intraspecific fighting and assessment. Because ground squirrels frequently place themselves at risk by harassing rattlesnakes, they stand to benefit from assessment strategies which serve to mediate risk. For example, larger and warmer snakes are more dangerous than smaller and cooler ones. These determinants of dangerousness covary with acoustic characteristics of the rattling sounds elicited by squirrel harassment. To determine whether squirrels use these acoustic cues regarding rattlesnake body size and body temperature, we played back rattling and control sounds to individuals in a population of free-living squirrels. The squirrels clearly associated rattling sounds with rattlesnakes and proved capable of assessing both determinants of rattlesnake dangerousness on the basis of acoustic cues. Several features of squirrel behaviour covaried with these acoustic cues, including tail flagging, bipedal posture, and hesitancy to reapproach the area where the rattle was heard. Many of these behavioural differences were sustained for up to 10 min postplayback. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Entities:  

Year:  1999        PMID: 10373264     DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1999.1095

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anim Behav        ISSN: 0003-3472            Impact factor:   2.844


  7 in total

1.  California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi) defenses against rattlesnake venom digestive and hemostatic toxins.

Authors:  James E Biardi; David C Chien; Richard G Coss
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2005-10-25       Impact factor: 2.626

2.  Tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) spontaneously use visual but not acoustic information to find hidden food items.

Authors:  Annika Paukner; Mary E Huntsberry; Stephen J Suomi
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.231

3.  Does Rattling Deter? The Case of Domestic Dogs.

Authors:  Nancy G Caine; Rita Muñoz; Michele M Mulholland
Journal:  Ethology       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 1.897

4.  California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi) defenses against rattlesnake venom digestive and hemostatic toxins.

Authors:  James E Biardi; David C Chien; Richard G Coss
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2006-02-26       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  Selective reactions to different killer whale call categories in two delphinid species.

Authors:  Matthew T Bowers; Ari S Friedlaender; Vincent M Janik; Douglas P Nowacek; Nicola J Quick; Brandon L Southall; Andrew J Read
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2018-06-12       Impact factor: 3.312

6.  Direct look from a predator shortens the risk-assessment time by prey.

Authors:  Sang-im Lee; Soyun Hwang; Young-eun Joe; Hyun-kyung Cha; Gun-ho Joo; Hyeon-jeong Lee; Ji-won Kim; Piotr G Jablonski
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-05       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Physiological Stress Integrates Resistance to Rattlesnake Venom and the Onset of Risky Foraging in California Ground Squirrels.

Authors:  Matthew L Holding; Breanna J Putman; Lauren M Kong; Jennifer E Smith; Rulon W Clark
Journal:  Toxins (Basel)       Date:  2020-09-27       Impact factor: 4.546

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.