State of emergency: Behavior of gerbils is affected by the hunger state of their predators

Ecology

Volumn 91, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 593-600

  Oded, Berger Tal ^a   Kotler, Burt P ^a  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

Author keywords

Allenby's gerbils; Barn Owls; Foraging; Gerbillus andersoni allenbyi; Giving up density; Patch use; Predator state; Predator prey interactions; Tyto alba

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; PATCH USE; PREDATOR; PREDATOR-PREY INTERACTION; RAPTOR; RODENT;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ARTICLE; GERBIL; OWL; PHYSIOLOGY; TIME;

ANIMALS; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; GERBILLINAE; STRIGIFORMES; TIME FACTORS;

GERBILLINAE; GERBILLUS ANDERSONI; STRIGIFORMES; TYTO ALBA; TYTONIDAE;

EID: 77949291646     PISSN: 00129658     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1890/09-0112.1     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Abjomsson, K., B. M. A. Wagner, A. Axelsson, R. Bjerselius, and K. H. Olsen. 1997. Responses of Acilius sulcatus (Coleóptera: Dytiscidae) to chemical cues from perch (Perca fluviatilis). Oecologia 111:166-171.
2. Abramsky, Z., S. Brand, and M. L. Rosenzweig. 1985a. Geographical ecology of gerbilline rodents in sand dunes habitats of Israel. Journal of Biogeography 2:363-372.
3. Abramsky, Z., M. L. Rosenzweig, and S. Brand. 1985A. Habitat selection of Israel desert rodents: comparisons of a traditional and a new method of analysis. Oikos 45:79-88.
4. Abramsky, Z., E. Strauss, A. Subach, B. P. Kotier, and A. Riechman. 1996. The effect of barn owls (Tyto alba) on the activity and microhabitat selection of Gerbillus allenbyi and G. pyramidum. Oecologia 105:313-319.
5. Altwegg, R. 2003. Hungry predators render predator-avoidance behavior in tadpoles ineffective. Oikos 100:311-316.
6. Bar, Y., Z. Abramsky, and Y. Gutterman. 1984. Diet of gerbilline rodents in the Israeli Desert. Journal of Arid Environments 7:371-376.
7. Barnett, C. A., M. Bateson, and C. Rowe. 2007. Statedependent decision making: educated predators strategically trade off the costs and benefits of consuming aposematic prey. Behavioral Ecology 18:645-651.
8. Bell, R. D., A. L. Rypstra, and M. H. Persons. 2006. The effect of predator hunger on chemically mediated antipredator responses and survival in the wolf spider Pardosa milvina (Araneae: Lycosidae). Ethology 112:903-910.
9. Berger-Tal, O., S. Mukherjee, B. P. Kotier, and J. S. Brown. 2009. Look before you leap: Is risk of injury a foraging cost? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, in press, [doi: 10.1007/ S00265-009-0809-813]
10. Brown, J. S. 1988. Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk, and competition. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 22:37-47.
11. Brown, J. S. 1992. Patch use under prédation risk. I. Models and predictions. Annales Zoologici Fennici 29:301-309.
12. Brown, J. S. 1999. Vigilance, patch use and habitat selection: Foraging under predation risk. Evolutionary Ecology Research 1:49-71.
13. Brown, J. S., and B. P. Kotier. 2004. Hazardous duty pay and the foraging cost of prédation. Ecology Letters 7:999-1014.
14. Brown, J. S., B. P. Kotier, and A. Bouskila. 2001. The ecology of fear: Foraging games between predators and prey with pulsed resources. Annales Zoologici Fennici 38:71-87.
15. Brown, J. S., J. W. Laundre, and M. Gurung. 1999. The ecology of fear: optimal foraging, game theory, and trophic interactions. Journal of Mammalogy 80:385-399.
16. Brown, J. S., R. A. Morgan, and B. D. Dow. 1992. Patch use under predation risk II: A test with fox squirrels, Sciurus niger. Annales Zoologici Fennici 29:311-318.
17. Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging: the marginal value theorem. Theoretical Population Biology 9:129-136.
18. DaIl, S. R. X., B. P. Kotier, and A. Bouskila. 2001. Attention, apprehension, and gerbils searching in patches. Annales Zoológica Fennica 38:15-23.
19. Gotceitas, V., S. Fraser, and J. A. Brown. 1995. Habitat use by juvenile Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) in the presence of an actively foraging and non-foraging predator. Marine Biology 123:421-430.
20. Hammond, J. I., B. Luttbeg, and A. Sih. 2007. Predator and prey space use: dragonflies and tadpoles in an interactive game. Ecology 88:1525-1535.
21. Helfman, G. S. 1989. Threat-sensitive predator avoidance in damselfish-trumpetfish interactions. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 24:47-58.
22. Hileman, J. S., E. D. Brodie, and D. R. Formanowicz. 1995. Avoidance of unpalatable prey by predaceous diving beetle larvae: the role of hunger level and experience (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae). Journal of Insect Behavior 8:241-249.
23. Hochman, V., and B. P. Kotier. 2007. Patch use, apprehension, and vigilance behavior of Nubian Ibex under perceived risk of predation. Behavioral Ecology 18:368-374.
24. Holmes, W. G. 1991. Predator risk affects foraging behaviour of pikas: observational and experimental evidence. Animal Behaviour 42:111-119.
25. Kishida, O., and K. Nishimura. 2005. Multiple inducible defenses against multiple predators in the anuran tadpole, Rana pirica. Evolutionary Ecology Research 7:619-631.
26. Kotier, B. P. 1984. The effects of illumination on the rates of resource harvesting in a community of desert rodents. American Midland Naturalist 111:383-389.
27. Kotier, B. P., and J. S. Brown. 1990. Rates of seed harvest by two species of gerbilline rodents. Journal of Mammalogy 71: 591-596.
28. Kotier, B. P., and L. Blaustein. 1995. Titrating food and safety in a heterogeneous environment: when are the risky and safe patches of equal value? Oikos 74:251-258.
29. Kotier, B. P., J. S. Brown, S. R. X. DaIl, S. Gresser, D. Ganey, and A. Bouskila. 2002. Foraging games between owls and gerbils: temporal dynamics of resource depletion and apprehension in gerbils. Evolutionary Ecology Research 4: 495-518.
30. Kotier, B. P., J. S. Brown, and W. A. Mitchell. 1993. Environmental factors affecting patch use in gerbilline rodents. Journal of Mammalogy 74:614-620.
31. Licht, T. 1989. Discrimination between hungry and satiated predators: the response of guppies (Poecilia reticulata) from high and low predation sites. Ethology 87:238-243.
32. Lima, S. L. 1988. Initiation and termination of daily feeding in dark-eyed juncos: influences of predation risk and energy reserves. Oikos 53:3-11.
33. Mchich, R., P. Auger, and C. Lett. 2006. Effects of aggregative and solitary individual behaviors on the dynamics of predator-prey game models. Ecological Modelling 197:281-289.
34. McNamara, J. M., and A. I. Houston. 1986. The common currency for behavioral decisions. American Naturalist 127: 358-378.
35. Paz, U., and Y. Eshbol. 1990. Photographic guide to the birds of Israel. Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem, Isreal.
36. Perlman, Y., and I. Tsurim. 2008. Daring, risk assessment and body condition interactions in steppe buzzards. Journal of Avian Biology 39:226-228.
37. Phillips, D. W. 1978. Chemical mediation of invertebrate defensive behaviors and the ability to distinguish between foraging and inactive predators. Marine Biology 49:237-243.
38. Ritchie, M. E. 1990. Optimal foraging and fitness in Columbian ground squirrels. Oecologia 82:56-67.
39. Sherratt, T. N. 2003. State-dependent risk-taking by predators in systems with defended prey. Oikos 103:93-100.
40. Sih, A. 1979. Stability and prey behavioral-responses to predator density. Journal of Animal Ecology 1:79-89.
41. Sih, A. 1980. Optimal behavior: can foragers balance two conflicting demands? Science 210:1041-1043.
42. Sih, A. 1998. Game theory and predator-prey response races. Pages 221-238 in L. A. Dugatkin and H. K. Reeve, editors. Game theory and animal behavior. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
43. Smith, M. E., and M. C. Belk. 2001. Risk assessment in western mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis): do multiple cues have additive effects? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 51: 101-107.
44. SPSS. 2006. SPSS. Version 15.0. SPSS, Chicago,
45. Illinois, USA. Whitham, J., and A. Mathis. 2000. Effects of hunger and predation risk on foraging behavior of graybelly salamanders, Eurycea multiplicata. Journal of Chemical Ecology 26: 1659-1665.