Do nomadic avian predators synchronize population fluctuations of small mammals? a field experiment

Oecologia ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 107 (4) ◽  
pp. 478-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Norrdahl ◽  
Erkki Korpim�ki
Oikos ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 62 (2) ◽  
pp. 195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erkki Korpimäki ◽  
Kai Norrdahl ◽  
Erkki Korpimaki

2002 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lainie Berry

Predation rates of nests at human-induced habitat edges may be greater than in forest interior due to differences in predator assemblages and predator activity. I compared the predation rates on 192 artificial nests containing plasticine eggs placed in forest edge and interior sites at Bunyip State Park, Victoria. The nest-predation rates at the forest edge sites were significantly greater (mean = 52–58%) than that at the forest interior sites (mean = 30–39%). The relative rates of predation by birds compared with mammals were significantly greater at forest edge sites (mean = 78–94%) than at forest interior sites (mean = 36–67%). Higher rates of nest predation at forest edges appeared to be due to greater densities of avian predators such as the grey shrike-thrush (Colluricincla harmonica), and/or lower abundances of small mammals. However, biases towards certain predator types may mask real, or create false, patterns in predation rates of artificial nests. A better understanding of how predators respond to artificial nests compared with natural nests is required. Until then, results of predation studies that use artificial nests should be interpreted with caution.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruchuan He ◽  
Craig Barnett ◽  
Emilio Pagani-Núñez ◽  
Eben Goodale

Abstract Aposematic organisms defend themselves through various means to increase their unprofitability to predators which they advertise with conspicuous warning signals. Predators learn to avoid aposematic prey through associative learning that leads to lower predation. However, when these visual signals become unreliable (e.g., through automimicry or Batesian mimicry), predators may switch from using visual signals to taste sampling prey to choose among them (‘go-slow’ behaviour). In this experiment, we tested this possibility in a field experiment where we released a total of 9600 mealworm prey of two types: (i) undefended prey (injected with water) and (ii) model-mimics (injected with either quinine sulphate [models] or water [mimics]). Prey were deployed at 12 sites, each with a mimic frequency ratio between 0 to 1, at 0.2 intervals. We found that taste rejection peaked at moderate mimic frequencies (0.4 and 0.6), supporting the idea that taste sampling and rejection of prey is related to signal reliability and predator uncertainty. This is the first time that taste-rejection has been shown to be related to the reliability of prey signals in a mimetic prey system.


1979 ◽  
Vol 111 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. McNamee

AbstractA theory for the population behavior of the eastern blackheaded budworm is presented. The qualitative properties and key processes of the system are identified and a description of the theory as a simulation model is given. Two domains of stability exist for the insect; one is caused by bird predation, the second by the effects of food limitation. The model predicts that the budworm’s cyclical population fluctuations are produced by the disappearance and reappearance of these stable domains and consequent movement of densities to new levels. Parasitism is identified as the principal mechanism causing this behavior. A qualitative comparison of model behavior with historical behavior is made and a critical field experiment to test the validity of the theory is proposed. Finally it is suggested that the population behavior of many forest defoliators may be explained using this theory.


The Auk ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 117 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila A. Rangen ◽  
Robert G. Clark ◽  
Keith A. Hobson

Abstract Artificial nests are commonly used to investigate relative rates of nest predation in birds, but several methodological considerations need to be addressed before results from natural and artificial nests can be compared. Using field and laboratory experiments, we examined responses of predators to visual and olfactory cues that were associated with wicker nests and their contents. Avian predators did not discriminate between wicker nests dipped in mud and those covered by a camouflage fabric, whereas mammalian predators showed a weak tendency to depredate camouflaged nests. Nests containing plasticine eggs were depredated more often than nests containing only quail eggs and finch eggs, although no response to number of plasticine eggs in nests was found. The higher predation of nests with plasticine eggs may have resulted because small mammals, relying on olfactory cues, comprised a large portion of the predator assemblage. Field results were supported in tests where captive deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) were attracted to assortments of egg types that included plasticine. Time required by captive deer mice to penetrate quail eggs and finch eggs versus plasticine eggs varied as a function of egg size and shell thickness and strength. Overall, domestic finch eggs provided a better alternative to quail eggs because they were small enough to allow detection of predation events by small mammals and did not have an unnatural odor like plasticine. Potential problems with nest concealment, egg visibility, egg odors, and other factors must be resolved to enhance the design and reliability of artificial nest experiments.


Oikos ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 259 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. O. Lagos ◽  
L. C. Contreras ◽  
P. L. Meserve ◽  
J. R. Gutiérrez ◽  
F. M. Jaksic ◽  
...  

Koedoe ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
J. A. J Nel ◽  
I. L Rautenbach ◽  
D. A Els ◽  
G De Graaff

The state of knowledge pertaining to the biology of small mammals occurring in the Kalahari Gemsbok National Park is reviewed with reference to completed and ongoing projects. Aspects of daily activity rhythms, habitat selection, diet, population fluctuations and changes in community structure, as well as reproduction are discussed. The zoogeography of the park is alluded to, and aspects which need ad- ditional attention are mentioned.


Oikos ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 109 (3) ◽  
pp. 583-593 ◽  
Author(s):  
Otso Huitu ◽  
Jesse Laaksonen ◽  
Kai Norrdahl ◽  
Erkki Korpimäki

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document