Literature DB >> 23348773

How the informational environment shapes how prey estimate predation risk and the resulting indirect effects of predators.

Barney Luttbeg1, Geoffrey C Trussell.   

Abstract

Prey often behaviorally respond to changes in the intensity of predation risk, and these responses can often significantly shape community dynamics, but flexible responses to changes in predation risk require that prey have accurate and timely estimates of predation risk. We present a model of how a prey's environment should shape the cognitive rules they use to assess predation risk and present how these rules shape the effects predators have on prey and the prey's resources. In the model, prey can rely on a combination of a fixed estimate of predation risk and a flexible estimate of predation risk shaped by their recent experience. Prey relied more on their experience to estimate predation risk when predator cues were more reliable and when predator densities were lower. In addition, when the prey cognitive rules favored a greater use of their experience to estimate predation risk, the presence of predators caused larger nonconsumptive effects and generally smaller consumptive effects on prey and the prey's resources. These differences in prey cognition also altered the effects that alterations of cue reliability and predator densities had on prey and their resources.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23348773     DOI: 10.1086/668823

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Nat        ISSN: 0003-0147            Impact factor:   3.926


  8 in total

1.  Predatory fish sounds can alter crab foraging behaviour and influence bivalve abundance.

Authors:  A Randall Hughes; David A Mann; David L Kimbro
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2014-08-07       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 2.  The information provided by the absence of cues: insights from Bayesian models of within and transgenerational plasticity.

Authors:  Judy A Stamps; Alison M Bell
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Integrating theoretical and empirical approaches for a robust understanding of endocrine flexibility.

Authors:  Jennifer L Grindstaff; Lynne E Beaty; Medhavi Ambardar; Barney Luttbeg
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 3.308

4.  The concentration of fear: mice's behavioural and physiological stress responses to different degrees of predation risk.

Authors:  Beatriz Sánchez-González; Aimara Planillo; Álvaro Navarro-Castilla; Isabel Barja
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2018-01-31

5.  Behavioral responses to predatory sounds predict sensitivity of cetaceans to anthropogenic noise within a soundscape of fear.

Authors:  Patrick J O Miller; Saana Isojunno; Eilidh Siegal; Frans-Peter A Lam; Petter H Kvadsheim; Charlotte Curé
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 12.779

6.  Multi-species suppression of herbivores through consumptive and non-consumptive effects.

Authors:  Kathryn S Ingerslew; Deborah L Finke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-23       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Sender and receiver experience alters the response of fish to disturbance cues.

Authors:  Jack A Goldman; Laurence E A Feyten; Indar W Ramnarine; Grant E Brown
Journal:  Curr Zool       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 2.624

8.  Risk assessment based on indirect predation cues: revisiting fine-grained variation.

Authors:  Michael W McCoy; Stefan K Wheat; Karen M Warkentin; James R Vonesh
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2015-09-27       Impact factor: 2.912

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.