4.5 Article

The effects of predation risk on the use of social foraging tactics

期刊

ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR
卷 67, 期 -, 页码 301-308

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2003.06.012

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effects of predation on the use of social foraging tactics, such as producing and scrounging, are poorly known in animals. On the one hand, recent theoretical models predict increased use of scrounging with increasing predation risk, when scroungers seeking feeding opportunities also have a higher chance of detecting predators. On the other hand, there may be no relation between tactic use and predation when antipredator vigilance is not compatible with scanning flockmates. We investigated experimentally the effects of predation risk on social foraging tactic use in tree sparrows, Passer montanus. We manipulated predation risk in the field by changing the distance between shelter and a feeder. Birds visited the feeder in smaller flocks, spent less time on it and were somewhat more vigilant far from shelter than close to it. Increased predation risk strongly affected the social foraging tactic used: birds used the scrounger tactic 30% more often far from cover than close to it. Between-flock variability in scrounging frequency was not related to the average vigilance level of the flock members, and within-flock variability in the use of scrounging was negatively related to the vigilance of birds. Our results suggest that in tree sparrows, the increased frequency of scrounging during high predation risk cannot simply be explained by an additional advantage of increasing antipredator vigilance. We propose alternative mechanisms (e.g. increased stochasticity in food supply, and that riskier places are used by individuals with lower reserves) that may explain increased scrounging when animals forage under high predation risk. (C) 2004 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据