Literature DB >> 19175444

Body size and predatory performance in wolves: is bigger better?

Daniel R MacNulty1, Douglas W Smith, L David Mech, Lynn E Eberly.   

Abstract

1. Large body size hinders locomotor performance in ways that may lead to trade-offs in predator foraging ability that limit the net predatory benefit of larger size. For example, size-related improvements in handling prey may come at the expense of pursuing prey and thus negate any enhancement in overall predatory performance due to increasing size. 2. This hypothesis was tested with longitudinal data from repeated observations of 94 individually known wolves (Canis lupus) hunting elk (Cervus elaphus) in Yellowstone National Park, USA. Wolf size was estimated from an individually based sex-specific growth model derived from body mass measurements of 304 wolves. 3. Larger size granted individual wolves a net predatory advantage despite substantial variation in its effect on the performance of different predatory tasks; larger size improved performance of a strength-related task (grappling and subduing elk) but failed to improve performance of a locomotor-related task (selecting an elk from a group) for wolves > 39 kg. 4. Sexual dimorphism in wolf size also explained why males outperformed females in each of the three tasks considered (attacking, selecting, and killing). 5. These findings support the generalization that bigger predators are overall better hunters, but they also indicate that increasing size ultimately limits elements of predatory behaviour that require superior locomotor performance. We argue that this could potentially narrow the dietary niche of larger carnivores as well as limit the evolution of larger size if prey are substantially more difficult to pursue than to handle.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19175444     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01517.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Ecol        ISSN: 0021-8790            Impact factor:   5.091


  18 in total

1.  Heterogeneity of hunting ability and nutritional status among domestic dogs in lowland Nicaragua.

Authors:  Jeremy M Koster; Kenneth B Tankersley
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-01-09       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Building a mechanistic understanding of predation with GPS-based movement data.

Authors:  Evelyn Merrill; Håkan Sand; Barbara Zimmermann; Heather McPhee; Nathan Webb; Mark Hebblewhite; Petter Wabakken; Jacqueline L Frair
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2010-07-27       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Genome-wide signatures of population bottlenecks and diversifying selection in European wolves.

Authors:  M Pilot; C Greco; B M vonHoldt; B Jędrzejewska; E Randi; W Jędrzejewski; V E Sidorovich; E A Ostrander; R K Wayne
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 3.821

4.  Body shape convergence driven by small size optimum in marine angelfishes.

Authors:  Bruno Frédérich; Francesco Santini; Nicolai Konow; Joseph Schnitzler; David Lecchini; Michael E Alfaro
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.703

5.  Harvest and group effects on pup survival in a cooperative breeder.

Authors:  David E Ausband; Michael S Mitchell; Carisa R Stansbury; Jennifer L Stenglein; Lisette P Waits
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  Specialization for aggression in sexually dimorphic skeletal morphology in grey wolves (Canis lupus).

Authors:  Jeremy S Morris; Ellissa K Brandt
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 2.610

7.  Pervasive Effects of Aging on Gene Expression in Wild Wolves.

Authors:  Pauline Charruau; Rachel A Johnston; Daniel R Stahler; Amanda Lea; Noah Snyder-Mackler; Douglas W Smith; Bridgett M vonHoldt; Steven W Cole; Jenny Tung; Robert K Wayne
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 16.240

8.  How many cubs can a mum nurse? Maternal age and size influence litter size in polar bears.

Authors:  Dorinda Marie Folio; Jon Aars; Olivier Gimenez; Andrew E Derocher; Øystein Wiig; Sarah Cubaynes
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2019-05-31       Impact factor: 3.703

9.  The concerted impact of domestication and transposon insertions on methylation patterns between dogs and grey wolves.

Authors:  Ilana Janowitz Koch; Michelle M Clark; Michael J Thompson; Kerry A Deere-Machemer; Jun Wang; Lionel Duarte; Gitanjali E Gnanadesikan; Eskender L McCoy; Liudmilla Rubbi; Daniel R Stahler; Matteo Pellegrini; Elaine A Ostrander; Robert K Wayne; Janet S Sinsheimer; Bridgett M vonHoldt
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 6.185

10.  Effect of sociality and season on gray wolf (Canis lupus) foraging behavior: implications for estimating summer kill rate.

Authors:  Matthew C Metz; John A Vucetich; Douglas W Smith; Daniel R Stahler; Rolf O Peterson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.