Risk management in optimal foragers: The effect of sightlines and predator type on patch use, time allocation, and vigilance in gerbils

Oikos

Volumn 120, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1657-1666

  Embar, Keren ^a   Kotler, Burt P ^a   Mukherjee, Shomen ^a  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENCOUNTER RATE; FELID; FORAGING BEHAVIOR; LIGHT AVAILABILITY; MORTALITY RISK; OPTIMIZATION; PATCH USE; PREDATION RISK; RAPTOR; RISK ASSESSMENT; RODENT; TIME ALLOCATION; VIGILANCE;

CANIDAE; GERBILLINAE; STRIGIFORMES; TYTONIDAE;

EID: 80055079966     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2011.19278.x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Abramsky Z. et al. 2002. The costs of apprehensive foraging. Ecology 83: 1330-1340.
2. Arenz C. L. and Leger D. W. 1997. Artificial visual obstruction, antipredator vigilance, and predator detection in the thirteen-lined ground squirrel (Spermophilus tridecemlineatus). Behaviour 134: 1101-1114.
3. Arenz C. L. and Leger D. W. 1999. Thirteen-lined ground squirrel (Sciuridae: Spermophilus tridecemlineatus) antipredator vigilance decreases as vigilance cost increases. Anim. Behav. 57: 97-103.
4. Ben-Natan G. et al. 2004. Seed distribution in sand dunes: a basis for coexistence of two rodent species. Oikos 105: 325-335.
5. Berger-Tal O. et al. 2010. Complex state-dependent games between owls and gerbils. Ecol. Lett. 13: 302-310.
6. Brown J. S. 1988. Patch use as an indicator of habitat preference, predation risk and competition. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 22: 37-47.
7. Brown J. S. 1999. Vigilance, patch use and habitat selection: foraging under predation risk. Evol. Ecol. Res. 1: 49-71.
8. Brown J. S. et al. 1999. The ecology of fear: optimal foraging, game theory and trophic interactions. J. Mammal. 80: 385-399.
9. Brown J. S. et al. 2001. Ecology of fear: foraging games between predators and prey with pulsed resources. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 38: 71-87.
10. Burger J. et al. 2000. Factors affecting vigilance in springbok: importance of vegetative cover, location in herd, and herd size. Acta Ethol. 2: 97-104.
11. Dall S. R. X. et al. 2001. Attention, 'apprehension' and gerbils searching in patches. Ann. Zool. Fenn. 38: 15-23.
12. Devereux C. L. et al. 2006. Predator detection and avoidance by starlings under differing scenarios of predation risk. Behav. Ecol. 17: 303-309.
13. Ebensperger L. A. and Hurtado M. J. 2005. On the relationship between herbaceous cover and vigilance activity of degus (Octodon degus). Ethology 111: 593-608.
14. Fernandez-Juricic E. et al. 2005. Increasing the costs of conspecific scanning in socially foraging starlings affects vigilance and foraging behaviour. Anim. Behav. 69: 73-81.
15. FitzGibbon C. D. 1994. The costs and benefits of predator inspection behaviour in Thomson's gazelles. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 34: 139-148.
16. Harkin E. L. et al. 2000. The influence of visual obstructions on the vigilance and escape behaviour of house sparrows, Passer domesticus. Aust. J. Zool. 48: 259-263.
17. Kluever B. M. et al. 2008. Vigilance in cattle: the influence of predation, social interactions, and environmental factors. Rangeland. Ecol. Manage. 61: 321-328.
18. Kotler B. P. 1997. Patch use by gerbils in a risky environment: manipulating food and safety to test four models. Oikos 78: 274-282.
19. Kotler B. P. and Brown J. S. 1990. Rates of seed harvest by two species of gerbiline rodents. J. Mammal. 71: 591-596.
20. Kotler B. P. et al. 1988. The effects of morphology and body size on rates of owl predation on desert rodents. Oikos 53: 145-152.
21. Kotler B. P. et al. 1991. Factors affecting gerbil foraging behavior and rates of owl predation. Ecology 72: 2249-2260.
22. Kotler B. P. et al. 2002. Foraging games between gerbils and their predators: temporal dynamics of resource depletion and apprehension in gerbils. Evol. Ecol. Res. 4: 495-518.
23. Kotler B. P. et al. 2004a. Apprehension and time allocation in gerbils: the effects of predatory risk and energetic state. Ecology 85: 917-922.
24. Kotler B. P. et al. 2004b. Foraging games between gerbils and their predators: seasonal changes in schedules of activity and apprehension. Isr. J. Zool 50: 255-271.
25. Kotler B. P. et al. 2010. Moonlight avoidance in gerbils reveals a sophisticated interplay among time allocation, vigilance and state-dependent foraging. Proc. R. Soc. B 277: 1469-1474.
26. Liley S. and Creel S. 2008. What best explains vigilance in elk: characteristics of prey, predators or the environment? Behav. Ecol. 19: 245-254.
27. Lima S. L. 1987a. Vigilance while feeding and its relation to the risk of predation. J. Theor. Biol. 124: 303-316.
28. Lima S. L. 1987b. Distance to cover, visual obstructions and vigilance in house sparrows. Behavior 102: 231-238.
29. Lima S. L. and Dill L. M. 1990. Behavioral decisions made under the risk of predation - a review and prospectus. Can. J. Zool./Rev. Can. Zool 68: 619-640.
30. Lima S. L. and Bednekoff P. A. 1999. Back to the basics of antipredatory vigilance: can nonvigilant animals detect attack? Anim. Behav. 58: 537-543.
31. Poysa H. 1994. Group foraging, distance to cover and vigilance in the teal, Anas crecca. Anim. Behav. 48: 921-928.
32. Raveh A. et al. 2010. Driven to distraction: detecting the hidden costs of flea parasitism through foraging behaviour in gerbils. Ecol. Lett. 14: 47-51.
33. Vijayan S. et al. 2007. Influence of cover on the foraging behavior of Negev Desert gerbils. Bas. Appl. Dryland Res. 1: 51-66.
34. Whittingham M. J. and Evans K. L. 2004. The effects of habitat structure on predation risk of birds in agricultural landscapes. Ibis 146: 210-220.
35. Whittingham M. J. et al. 2004. The effect of limited visibility on vigilance behaviour and speed of predator detection: implications for the conservation of granivorous passerines. Oikos 106: 377-385.