Rethinking trophic niches: Speed and body mass colimit prey space of mammalian predators DOI Creative Commons
Myriam R. Hirt, Marlee A. Tucker, Thomas Müller

et al.

Ecology and Evolution, Journal Year: 2020, Volume and Issue: 10(14), P. 7094 - 7105

Published: June 28, 2020

Abstract Realized trophic niches of predators are often characterized along a one‐dimensional range in predator–prey body mass ratios. This prey is constrained by an “energy limit” and “subdue toward small large prey, respectively. Besides these ratios, maximum speed additional key component most interactions. Here, we extend the concept to two‐dimensional space incorporating hump‐shaped speed‐body relation. new “speed additionally constrains fast prey. To test this spaces for different hunting strategies (pursuit, group, ambush predation), synthesized data on 63 terrestrial mammalian interactions, their masses, speeds. We found that pursuit hunt smaller slower whereas group hunters focus larger but mostly ambushers more flexible. Group have evolved occupy similar niche avoids competition with predators. Moreover, our suggests energetic optima axis thereby provides mechanistic explanations why there no (referred as “micro‐lions”) or mega‐carnivores “mega‐cheetahs”). Our results demonstrate advancing ranges adding dimension will foster understanding predator improve predictions food web structure, ecosystem functions.

Language: Английский

Short-range interactions govern the dynamics and functions of microbial communities DOI
Alma Dal Co, Simon van Vliet,

Daniel J. Kiviet

et al.

Nature Ecology & Evolution, Journal Year: 2020, Volume and Issue: 4(3), P. 366 - 375

Published: Feb. 10, 2020

Language: Английский

Citations

238
An Ecosystems Perspective on Virus Evolution and Emergence DOI
Rebecca K. French, Edward C. Holmes

Trends in Microbiology, Journal Year: 2019, Volume and Issue: 28(3), P. 165 - 175

Published: Nov. 16, 2019

Language: Английский

Citations

132
The context dependence of non‐consumptive predator effects DOI Open Access
Aaron J. Wirsing, Michael R. Heithaus, Joel S. Brown

et al.

Ecology Letters, Journal Year: 2020, Volume and Issue: 24(1), P. 113 - 129

Published: Sept. 29, 2020

Abstract Non‐consumptive predator effects (NCEs) are now widely recognised for their capacity to shape ecosystem structure and function. Yet, forecasting the propagation of these predator‐induced trait changes through particular communities remains a challenge. Accordingly, focusing on plasticity in prey anti‐predator behaviours, we conceptualise multi‐stage process by which predators trigger direct indirect NCEs, review distil potential drivers contingencies into three key categories (properties prey, setting), then provide general framework predicting both nature strength NCEs. Our underscores myriad factors that can generate NCE while guiding how research might better anticipate account them. Moreover, our synthesis highlights value mapping habitat domains prey‐specific patterns evasion success (‘evasion landscapes’) as basis NCEs likely manifest any community. Looking ahead, highlight two knowledge gaps continue impede comprehensive understanding non‐consumptive predator–prey interactions consequences; namely, insufficient empirical exploration (1) context‐dependent (2) ways shaped interactively multiple context dependence.

Language: Английский

Citations

127
Integrating temporal refugia into landscapes of fear: prey exploit predator downtimes to forage in risky places DOI Open Access
Justine A. Smith, Emiliano Donadío, Jonathan N. Pauli

et al.

Oecologia, Journal Year: 2019, Volume and Issue: 189(4), P. 883 - 890

Published: March 13, 2019

Language: Английский

Citations

110
Humans and urban development mediate the sympatry of competing carnivores DOI
Remington J. Moll,

Jonathon D. Cepek,

Patrick D. Lorch

et al.

Urban Ecosystems, Journal Year: 2018, Volume and Issue: 21(4), P. 765 - 778

Published: April 17, 2018

Language: Английский

Citations

105
Predator–Prey Interactions in the Anthropocene: Reconciling Multiple Aspects of Novelty DOI
Peter W. Guiden, Savannah L. Bartel, Nathan W. Byer

et al.

Trends in Ecology & Evolution, Journal Year: 2019, Volume and Issue: 34(7), P. 616 - 627

Published: March 19, 2019

Language: Английский

Citations

99
Habitat selection patterns are density dependent under the ideal free distribution DOI Creative Commons
Tal Avgar, Gustavo S. Betini, John M. Fryxell

et al.

Journal of Animal Ecology, Journal Year: 2020, Volume and Issue: 89(12), P. 2777 - 2787

Published: Sept. 23, 2020

Abstract Despite being widely used, habitat selection models are rarely reliable and informative when applied across different ecosystems or over time. One possible explanation is that context‐dependent due to variation in consumer density and/or resource availability. The goal of this paper provide a general theoretical perspective on the contributory mechanisms density‐dependent selection, as well our capacity account for their effects. Towards we revisit ideal free distribution (IFD), where consumers assumed be omniscient, equally competitive freely moving, hence expected instantaneously distribute themselves heterogeneous landscape such fitness equalised population. Although these assumptions clearly unrealistic some degree, simplicity structure IFD provides useful vantage point help clarify understanding more complex spatial processes. Of equal importance, compatible with underlying common models. Here show how fitness‐maximising space use model, based IFD, gives rise shifts distribution, providing mechanistic outcomes often reported analysis. Our model suggests adaptive patterns would lead nonlinear non‐monotonic selection. These results indicate even under simplest about organismal behaviour, strength should critically depend system‐wide characteristics. Clarifying impact behavioural responses may pivotal making meaningful ecological inferences observed allow transferability predictions time space.

Language: Английский

Citations

73
Beyond spatial overlap: harnessing new technologies to resolve the complexities of predator–prey interactions DOI
Justin P. Suraci, Justine A. Smith, Simon Chamaillé‐Jammes

et al.

Oikos, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 2022(8)

Published: Feb. 21, 2022

Predation risk, the probability that a prey animal will be killed by predator, is fundamental to theoretical and applied ecology. risk varies with behavior environmental conditions, yet attempts understand predation in natural systems often ignore important ecological complexities, relying instead on proxies for actual such as predator–prey spatial overlap. Here we detail complexities driving disconnects between three stages of sequence are assumed tightly linked: overlap, encounters capture. Our review highlights several major sources variability lead decoupling overlap estimates from encounter rates (e.g. temporal activity patterns, predator movement capacity, resource limitations) affect capture given hunger levels, temporal, topographic other influences success). Emerging technologies statistical methods facilitating transition more spatiotemporally detailed, mechanistic understanding interactions, allowing concurrent examination multiple mobile, free‐ranging animals. We describe crucial applications this new ecology, highlighting opportunities better integrate contingencies into dynamic models harness interactions improve targeting effectiveness conservation interventions.

Language: Английский

Citations

68
Habitat complexity mediates the predator–prey space race DOI
Justine A. Smith, Emiliano Donadío, Jonathan N. Pauli

et al.

Ecology, Journal Year: 2019, Volume and Issue: 100(7)

Published: June 3, 2019

Abstract The spatial relationship between predator and prey is often conceptualized as a behavioral response race, in which avoid predators while track prey. Limiting habitat types can create anchors for or predators, influencing the likelihood that will dominate. Joint emerge when occupy similar feeding domains risk reward become spatially conflated, confusing predictions of player win space race. These dynamics risk‐foraging trade‐offs are obscured by heterogeneity community complexity large vertebrate systems, fueling ambiguity regarding generality from predator–prey theory. To test how distribution influences we examine correlation puma vicuña selection use at two sites, one generates distinct risk–foraging trade‐off joint anchor. vegetation, serves both forage vicuñas stalking cover pumas, differs sites; llano contains single central meadow acts anchor, canyon characterized more heterogeneous vegetation. Puma–vicuña was positive negative canyon, similarly, utilization distributions were strongly correlated than canyon. Vicuña locations occurred higher values Similarly, Although pumas consistently selected utilized vegetative topographic regardless distribution, only against vegetation site, reducing with pumas. Our work suggests anchor favors race due to inability crucial foraging habitat. outcome appears be informed habitat, whereby corresponding predictability game.

Language: Английский

Citations

75
Landscape of fear and human-predator coexistence: Applying spatial predator-prey interaction theory to understand and reduce carnivore-livestock conflict DOI
Jennifer R. B. Miller, Oswald J. Schmitz

Biological Conservation, Journal Year: 2019, Volume and Issue: 236, P. 464 - 473

Published: June 12, 2019

Language: Английский

Citations

75