Literature DB >> 10479369

Back to the basics of antipredatory vigilance: can nonvigilant animals detect attack?

.   

Abstract

Many birds and mammals respond to a heightened risk of predation, especially that associated with smaller group sizes, with an increase in vigilance. All interpretations of the way in which vigilance responds to changes in predation risk assume that animals feeding with their heads down (i.e. animals in a nonvigilant state) cannot detect approaching predators. We provide the first explicit test of this assumption by 'flying' a mounted hawk down a 15-m chute towards actively feeding, free-living, dark-eyed juncos, Junco hyemalis. Juncos were targeted individually for simulated attack when they had either a 'head-down' view up the chute, or a completely unobstructed view; a junco with a head-down view could see up the chute only when it lowered its head to feed. Juncos with an unobstructed view almost always detected the hawk at the maximum distance of 15 m. Juncos with a head-down view usually detected the attack at a distance of 10-15 m against a grey background, but detection distances were shorter when attacks occurred against a camouflaged background. The results demonstrate that these birds have a considerable ability to detect approaching predators even when not overtly vigilant, although their detection ability is greater when they raise their heads. Vigilance sequences, therefore, probably consist of bouts of low-quality detection (active feeding) interspersed with bouts of higher-quality detection (overt vigilance) that can only be accomplished at the expense of feeding. This realization has major implications for current interpretations of the vigilance group size effect and antipredator vigilance in general. Copyright 1999 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour.

Entities:  

Year:  1999        PMID: 10479369     DOI: 10.1006/anbe.1999.1182

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


  35 in total

1.  Prey scan at random to evade observant predators.

Authors:  J Scannell; G Roberts; J Lazarus
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2001-03-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Evolutionary stability of vigilance coordination among social foragers.

Authors:  Miguel A Rodríguez-Gironés; Rodrigo A Vásquez
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-09-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Good foragers can also be good at detecting predators.

Authors:  W Cresswell; J L Quinn; M J Whittingham; S Butler
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2003-05-22       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Potential disadvantages of using socially acquired information.

Authors:  Luc-Alain Giraldeau; Thomas J Valone; Jennifer J Templeton
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2002-11-29       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  A simple rule for the costs of vigilance: empirical evidence from a social forager.

Authors:  Guy Cowlishaw; Michael J Lawes; Margaret Lightbody; Alison Martin; Richard Pettifor; J Marcus Rowcliffe
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Negotiation may lead selfish individuals to cooperate: the example of the collective vigilance game.

Authors:  Etienne Sirot
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Negotiating a stable solution for vigilance behaviour.

Authors:  Andrew N Radford; Tim W Fawcett
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Testing domains of danger in the selfish herd: sparrowhawks target widely spaced redshanks in flocks.

Authors:  John L Quinn; Will Cresswell
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-10-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Change your diet or die: predator-induced shifts in insectivorous lizard feeding ecology.

Authors:  Dror Hawlena; Valentín Pérez-Mellado
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2009-05-24       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 10.  Obsessive-compulsive disorder: Insights from animal models.

Authors:  Henry Szechtman; Susanne E Ahmari; Richard J Beninger; David Eilam; Brian H Harvey; Henriette Edemann-Callesen; Christine Winter
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2016-05-07       Impact factor: 8.989

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.