Hierarchical movement decisions in predators: Effects of foraging experience at more than one spatial and temporal scale

Ecology

Volumn 90, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 3536-3545

  Amano, Tatsuya ^a,b   Katayama, Naoki ^c  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR AGRO ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES   (Japan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

Author keywords

Egretta intermedia; Marginal value theorem; Movement ecology; Optimal foraging; Patch departure rule; Search path; Spatial heterogeneity

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; BIRD; DECISION MAKING; MOVEMENT; OPTIMUM FORAGING THEORY; PADDY FIELD; PREY AVAILABILITY; PREY CAPTURE; PREY LOCATION; SPATIOTEMPORAL ANALYSIS; TRAVEL TIME;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; BIRD; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); PHYSIOLOGY; POPULATION MIGRATION; PREDATION; TIME;

ANIMAL MIGRATION; ANIMALS; BIRDS; FEEDING BEHAVIOR; MOVEMENT; PREDATORY BEHAVIOR; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR; TIME FACTORS;

ANIMALIA; ARDEIDAE; MESOPHOYX INTERMEDIA;

EID: 72949089319     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/08-1910.1     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Akaike, H. 1973. Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. Pages 267-281 in B. N. Petrov and F. Csaki, editors. Second international symposium on information theory. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, Hungary.
2. Alerstam, T., A. Hedenström, and S. Åkesson. 2003. Longdistance migration: evolution and determinants. Oikos 103: 247-260.
3. Aoyama, S., and T. Doi. 2006. Spawning site of the fluvial eight-barbel loach, Lefua sp., in the natural environment. Ichthyological Research 53: 107-112.
4. Benhamou, S. 1992. Efficiency of area-concentrated searching behavior in a continuous patchy environment. Journal of Theoretical Biology 159: 67-81.
5. Beyer, H. L. 2004. Hawth's analysis tools for ArcGIS. 〈http: // www.spatialecology.com/htools〉
6. Böerger, L., B. D. Dalziel, and J. M. Fryxell. 2008. Are there general mechanisms of animal home range behaviour? A review and prospects for future research. Ecology Letters 11: 637-650.
7. Bowler, D. E., and T. G. Benton. 2005. Causes and consequences of animal dispersal strategies: relating individual behaviour to spatial dynamics. Biological Reviews 80: 205-225.
8. Brown, J. S. 1988. Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 22: 37-47.
9. Burnham, K. P., and D. R. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Second edition. Springer-Verlag, New York, New York, USA.
10. Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theoretical Population Biology 9: 129-136.
11. Charnov, E. L., G. H. Orians, and K. Hyatt. 1976. Ecological implications of resource depression. American Naturalist 110: 247-259.
12. Cooke, S. J., S. G. Hindi, M. Wikelski, R. D. Andrews, L. J. Kuchel, T. G. Wolcott, and P. J. Butler. 2004. Biotelemetry: a mechanistic approach to ecology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 334-343.
13. Dayton, G. H., D. Saenz, K. A. Baum, R. B. Langerhans, and T. J. DeWitt. 2005. Body shape, burst speed and escape behavior of larval anurans. Oikos 111: 582-591.
14. Dukas, R., and L. A. Real. 1993. Effects of recent experience on foraging decisions by bumble bees. Oecologia 94: 244-246.
15. ESRI. 2004. Using ArcMap. ESRI, Redlands, California, USA.
16. ESRI. 2006. ArcPad 7. ESRI, Redlands, California, USA.
17. Fahrig, L. 2007. Non-optimal animal movement in human- altered landscapes. Functional Ecology 21: 1003-1015.
18. Fauchald, P. 1999. Foraging in a hierarchical patch system. American Naturalist 153: 603-613.
19. Fauchald, P., and T. Tveraa. 2006. Hierarchical patch dynamics and animal movement pattern. Oecologia 149: 383-395.
20. Forester, J. D., A. R. Ives, M. G. Turner, D. P. Anderson, D. Fortin, H. L. Beyer, D. W. Smith, and M. S. Boyce. 2007. State-space models link elk movement patterns to landscape characteristics in Yellowstone National Park. Ecological Monographs 77: 285-299.
21. Fortin, D. 2003. Searching behavior and use of sampling information by free-ranging bison (Bos bison). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 54: 194-203.
22. Fortin, D., H. L. Beyer, M. S. Boyce, D. W. Smith, T. Duchesne, and J. S. Mao. 2005. Wolves influence elk movements: Behavior shapes a trophic cascade in Yellowstone National Park. Ecology 86: 1320-1330.
23. Fritz, H., S. Said, and H. Weimerskirch. 2003. Scale-dependent hierarchical adjustments of movement patterns in a long- range foraging seabird. Proceedings of the Royal Society London B 270: 1143-1148.
24. Fryxell, J. M., M. Hazell, L. Börger, B. D. Dalziel, D. T. Haydon, J. M. Morales, T. Mcintosh, and R. C. Rosatte. 2008. Multiple movement modes by large herbivores at multiple spatiotemporal scales. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105: 19114-19119.
25. Fujimoto, Y., Y. Ouchi, T. Hakuba, H. Chiba, and M. Iwata. 2008. Influence of modern irrigation, drainage system and water management on spawning migration of mud loach, Misgurnus anguillicaudatus C. Environmental Biology of Fishes 81: 185-194.
26. Fujioka, M., J. W. Armacost, H. Yoshida, and T. Maeda. 2001. Value of fallow farmlands as summer habitats for waterbirds in a Japanese rural area. Ecological Research 16: 555-567.
27. Fujioka, M., and S. J. Lane. 1997. The impact of changing irrigation practices in rice fields on frog populations of the Kanto Plain, central Japan. Ecological Research 12: 101-108.
28. Gibson, R. N. 1980. A quantitative description of the behaviour of wild juvenile plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.). Animal Behaviour 28: 1202-1216.
29. Green, R. F. 1980. Bayesian birds: a simple example of Oaten's stochastic model of optimal foraging. Theoretical Population Biology 18: 244-256.
30. Hill, S., M. T. Burrows, and R. N. Hughes. 2002. Adaptive search in juvenile plaice foraging for aggregated and dispersed prey. Journal of Fish Biology 61: 1255-1267.
31. Hill, S. L., M. T. Burrows, and R. N. Hughes. 2003. The efficiency of adaptive search tactics for different prey distribution patterns: a simulation model based on the behaviour of juvenile plaice. Journal of Fish Biology 63: 117-130.
32. Holden, C. 2006. Inching toward movement ecology. Science 313: 779, 782.
33. Holyoak, M., R. Casagrandi, R. Nathan, E. Revilla, and O. Spiegel. 2008. Trends and missing parts in the study of movement ecology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105: 19060-19065.
34. Iwasa, Y., M. Higashi, and N. Yamamura. 1981. Prey distribution as a factor determining the choice of optimal foraging strategy. American Naturalist 117: 710-723.
35. Johnson, C. J., K. L. Parker, D. C. Heard, and M. P. Gillingham. 2002. Movement parameters of ungulates and scale-specific responses to the environment. Journal of Animal Ecology 71: 225-235.
36. Kareiva, P., and G. Odell. 1987. Swarms of predators exhibit "preytaxis" if individual predator use area-restricted search. American Naturalist 130: 233-270.
37. Katayama, N. 2009. Aggregative responses of generalist predators to different prey species distributions at multiple spatial scales. Thesis. University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
38. Kilpatrick, A. M., A. A. Chmura, D. W. Gibbons, R. C. Fleischer, P. P. Marra, and P. Daszak. 2006. From the cover: predicting the global spread of H5N1 avian influenza. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 103: 19368-19373.
39. Klaassen, R. H. G., B. A. Nolet, and D. Bankert. 2006a. Movement of foraging Tundra Swans explained by spatial pattern in cryptic food densities. Ecology 87: 2244-2254.
40. Klaassen, R. H. G., B. A. Nolet, J. A. van Gils, and S. Bauer. 2006b. Optimal movement between patches under incomplete information about the spatial distribution of food items. Theoretical Population Biology 70: 452-463.
41. Klaassen, R. H. G., B. A. Nolet, and C. H. A. van Leeuwen. 2007. Prior knowledge about spatial pattern affects patch assessment rather than movement between patches in tactile-feeding mallard. Journal of Animal Ecology 76: 20-29.
42. Kokko, H., and A. Lopez-Sepulcre. 2006. From individual dispersal to species ranges: Perspectives for a changing world. Science 313: 789-791.
43. Kotliar, N. B., and J. A. Wiens. 1990. Multiple scales of patchiness and patch structure: a hierarchical framework for the study of heterogeneity. Oikos 59: 253-260.
44. Lane, S. J., and M. Fujioka. 1998. The impact of changes in irrigation practices on the distribution offoraging egrets and herons (Ardeidae) in the rice fields of central Japan. Biological Conservation 83: 221-230.
45. Levey, D. J., B. M. Bolker, J. J. Tewksbury, S. Sargent, and N. M. Haddad. 2005. Effects of landscape corridors on seed dispersal by birds. Science 309: 146-148.
46. Matsushima, N., and M. Kawata. 2005. The choice of oviposition site and the effects of density and oviposition timing on survivorship in Rana japonica. Ecological Research 20: 81-86.
47. Mueller, T., and W. F. Fagan. 2008. Search and navigation in dynamic environments: from individual behaviors to population distributions. Oikos 117: 654-664.
48. Nathan, R. 2008. An emerging movement ecology paradigm. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105: 19050-19051.
49. Nathan, R., W. M. Getz, E. Revilla, M. Holyoak, R. Kadmon, D. Saltz, and P. E. Smouse. 2008. A movement ecology paradigm for unifying organismal movement research. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 105: 19052-19059.
50. Nonacs, P. 2001. State dependent behavior and the marginal value theorem. Behavioral Ecology 12: 71-83.
51. Olsson, O., and J. S. Brown. 2006. The foraging benefits of information and the penalty of ignorance. Oikos 112: 260-273.
52. Patterson, T. A., L. Thomas, C. Wilcox, O. Ovaskainen, and J. Matthiopoulos. 2008. State-space models of individual animal movement. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 23: 87-94.
53. Pinaud, D., and H. Weimerskirch. 2005. Scale-dependent habitat use in a long-ranging central place predator. Journal of Animal Ecology 74: 852-863.
54. R Development Core Team. 2006. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 〈http: //www. r-project.org〉
55. Sato, N., and N. Maruyama. 1996. Foraging site preference of intermediate egrets Egretta intermedia during the breeding season in the eastern part ofthe Kanto Plain, Japan. Journal of Yamashina Institute for Ornithology 28: 19-34. [In Japanese with English summary.]
56. Schick, R. S., S. R. Loarie, F. Colchero, B. D. Best, A. Boustany, D. A. Conde, P. N. Halpin, L. N. Joppa, C. M. McClellan, and J. S. Clark. 2008. Understanding movement data and movement processes: current and emerging directions. Ecology Letters 11: 1338-1350.
57. Tanigaki, N. 2001. Seasonal changes of intake rates and niche overlaps of three egret species in paddy fields. Thesis. University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
58. Thomas, G. 1974. Influences of encountering a food object on subsequent searching behaviour in Gasterosteus aculeatus L. Animal Behaviour 22: 941-952.
59. Travis, J. M. J., and S. C. F. Palmer. 2005. Spatial processes can determine the relationship between prey encounter rate and prey density. Biology Letters 1: 136-138.
60. Udagawa, T. 1964. Gensyoku Chorui Kensaku Zukan. Hokuryu-kan, Tokyo, Japan. [In Japanese.]
61. van Gils, J. A., I. W. Schenk, O. Bos, and T. Piersma. 2003. Incompletely informed shorebirds that face a digestive constraint maximize net energy gain when exploiting patches. American Naturalist 161: 777-793.
62. Walker, J. A., C. K. Ghalambor, O. L. Griset, D. McKenney, and D. N. Reznick. 2005. Do faster starts increase the probability of evading predators? Functional Ecology 19: 808-815.
63. Webster, M. S., P. P. Marra, S. M. Haig, S. Bensch, and R. T. Holmes. 2002. Links between worlds: unraveling migratory connectivity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 76-83.
64. Weimerskirch, H., D. Pinaud, F. Pawlowski, and C.-A. Bost. 2007. Does prey capture induce area-restricted search? A fine-scale study using GPS in a marine predator, the wandering albatross. American Naturalist 170: 734-743.
65. Wu, J., and O. L. Loucks. 1995. From balance of nature to hierarchical patch dynamics: a paradigm shift in ecology. Quarterly Review of Biology 70: 439-466.