Literature DB >> 2655726

Predator vigilance and group size in mammals and birds: a critical review of the empirical evidence.

M A Elgar.   

Abstract

One commonly cited benefit to animals that forage in groups is an increase in the probability of detecting a predator, and a decrease in the time spent in predator detection. A mathematical model (Pulliam 1973) predicts a negative relationship between group size and vigilance rates. Over fifty studies of birds and mammals report that the relationship at least partly explains why individuals forage in groups. This review evaluates the strength of these conclusions based on their evidence. Those variables that may confound the relationship between vigilance and group size are outlined, and their control is assessed for each study. The variables I consider to be important include the density and type of food; competition between individuals; the proximity to both a safe place and the observer; the presence of predators; the visibility within the habitat; the composition of the group; the ambient temperature and the time of day. Based on these assessments, most of the studies fail to adequately demonstrate an unambiguous relationship between vigilance behavior and group size. Nevertheless, many studies reveal interesting features of the relationship between vigilance and group size that should provide fruitful avenues for future research.

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2655726     DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1989.tb00636.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc        ISSN: 0006-3231


  101 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.  Evidence for a rule governing the avoidance of superfluous escape flights.

Authors:  W Cresswell; G M Hilton; G D Ruxton
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-04-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Look before you leap - individual variation in social vigilance shapes socio-spatial group properties in an agent-based model.

Authors:  Ellen Evers; Han de Vries; Berry M Spruijt; Elisabeth H M Sterck
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 2.980

4.  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

5.  Risk allocation and competition in foraging groups: reversed effects of competition if group size varies under risk of predation.

Authors:  Peter A Bednekoff; Steven L Lima
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2004-07-22       Impact factor: 5.349

6.  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

Review 7.  New perspectives in gaze sensitivity research.

Authors:  Gabrielle L Davidson; Nicola S Clayton
Journal:  Learn Behav       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.986

8.  Costs and benefits of group living are neither simple nor linear.

Authors:  Colin A Chapman; Kim Valenta
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Competition in foraging flocks of migrating semipalmated sandpipers.

Authors:  Guy Beauchamp
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2007-08-04       Impact factor: 3.225

10.  Ecological and hormonal correlates of antipredator behavior in adult Belding's ground squirrels (Spermophilus beldingi).

Authors:  Jill M Mateo
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2007-11-01       Impact factor: 2.980

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.