nonconsumptive effects
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

47
(FIVE YEARS 2)

H-INDEX

13
(FIVE YEARS 0)

2021 ◽  
pp. 109398
Author(s):  
Robert A. Montgomery ◽  
Jamie Raupp ◽  
Storm A. Miller ◽  
Matthew Wijers ◽  
Roxanne Lisowsky ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ricardo A. Scrosati

Predators influence prey demography through consumption, but the mere presence of predators may trigger behavioural changes in prey that, if persistent or intense, may also influence prey demography. A tractable system to study such nonconsumptive effects (NCEs) of predators involves intertidal invertebrates. This mini review summarises recent research using barnacles and mussels as prey and dogwhelks as predators. The field manipulation of dogwhelk density revealed that pelagic barnacle larvae avoid benthic settlement near dogwhelks, which limits barnacle recruitment, a relevant outcome because recruitment is the only source of population replenishment for barnacles, as they are sessile. This avoidance behaviour is likely triggered by waterborne dogwhelk cues and may have evolved to limit future predation risk. Increasing densities of barnacle recruits and adults can prevent such NCEs from occurring, seemingly because benthic barnacles attract conspecific larvae through chemical cues. Barnacle recruit density increased with the abundance of coastal phytoplankton (food for barnacle larvae and recruits), so barnacle food supply seems to indirectly limit dogwhelk NCEs. By inhibiting barnacle feeding, dogwhelk cues also limited barnacle growth and reproductive output. Wave action weakens dogwhelk NCEs likely through hydrodynamic influences. Dogwhelk cues also limit mussel recruitment, as mussel larvae also exhibit predator avoidance behaviour. The NCEs on recruitment are weaker for mussels than for barnacles, possibly because mussel larvae can detach themselves after initial settlement, an ability that barnacle larvae lack. Overall, these field experiments provide evidence of predator NCEs on prey demography for coastal marine systems.


Diversity ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 341
Author(s):  
M. Colter Chitwood ◽  
Marcus A. Lashley ◽  
Summer D. Higdon ◽  
Christopher S. DePerno ◽  
Christopher E. Moorman

Nonconsumptive effects of predators potentially have negative fitness consequences on prey species through changes in prey behavior. Coyotes (Canis latrans) recently expanded into the eastern United States, and raccoons (Procyon lotor) are a common mesocarnivore that potentially serve as competitors and food for coyotes. We used camera traps at baited sites to quantify vigilance behavior of feeding raccoons and used binomial logistic regression to analyze the effects of social and environmental factors. Additionally, we created raccoon and coyote activity patterns from the camera trap data by fitting density functions based on circular statistics and calculating the coefficient of overlap (Δ). Overall, raccoons were vigilant 46% of the time while foraging at baited sites. Raccoons were more vigilant during full moon and diurnal hours but less vigilant as group size increased and when other species were present. Raccoons and coyotes demonstrated nocturnal activity patterns, with coyotes more likely to be active during daylight hours. Overall, raccoons did not appear to exhibit high levels of vigilance. Activity pattern results provided further evidence that raccoons do not appear to fear coyotes, as both species were active at the same time and showed a high degree of overlap (Δ = 0.75) with little evidence of temporal segregation in activity. Thus, our study indicates that nonconsumptive effects of coyotes on raccoons are unlikely, which calls into question the ability of coyotes to initiate strong trophic cascades through some mesocarnivores.


2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 549-558
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Koch ◽  
Robert O. Hall ◽  
Barbara L. Peckarsky

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (13) ◽  
pp. 6714-6722 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolette Zukowski ◽  
Devin Kirk ◽  
Kiran Wadhawan ◽  
Dylan Shea ◽  
Denon Start ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 1751-1760 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Hutfluss ◽  
N J Dingemanse

Abstract Recreation negatively affects wildlife by influencing animal behavior vital to reproduction and survival. Such nonconsumptive effects of perceived predation risk are mainly studied in ground-breeding birds. However, if antipredator responses characterize bird species generally, so should nonconsumptive effects of perceived predation associated with human recreation. Moreover, as individuals consistently differ in behaviors linked to antipredator responses, they should also differ in responses to recreation, with bolder birds being less affected. To test this key prediction, we quantified effects of human recreation pressure on a cavity-breeding passerine. We uniquely quantified human recreation pressure over a substantial (8-year) period within 12 nest box populations of the great tit Parus major, assayed annually for reproductive parameters. We detected considerable spatial variation in recreation pressure. In plots with high recreation pressure, we found strong support for birds breeding further away from highly frequented paths and birds producing smaller clutches; we also found moderate support for birds producing fewer fledglings. These detrimental effects did not vary with behavioral proxies of an individual’s risk-taking phenotype (exploratory activity). This implies that effects of recreation pressure apply to the average bird, and extend to species (like forest birds) not previously considered.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (16) ◽  
pp. 9324-9333
Author(s):  
Jessica L. Mohlman ◽  
Rachel R. Gardner ◽  
I. B. Parnell ◽  
Nathan G. Wilhite ◽  
James A. Martin

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 259-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul K. Abram ◽  
Jacques Brodeur ◽  
Alberto Urbaneja ◽  
Alejandro Tena

The main modes of action of insect parasitoids are considered to be killing their hosts with egg laying followed by offspring development (reproductive mortality), and adults feeding on hosts directly (host feeding). However, parasitoids can also negatively affect their hosts in ways that do not contribute to current or future parasitoid reproduction (nonreproductive effects). Outcomes of nonreproductive effects for hosts can include death, altered behavior, altered reproduction, and altered development. On the basis of these outcomes and the variety of associated mechanisms, we categorize nonreproductive effects into ( a) nonconsumptive effects, ( b) mutilation, ( c) pseudoparasitism, ( d) immune defense costs, and ( e) aborted parasitism. These effects are widespread and can cause greater impacts on host populations than successful parasitism or host feeding. Nonreproductive effects constitute a hidden dimension of host–parasitoid trophic networks, with theoretical implications for community ecology as well as applied importance for the evaluation of ecosystem services provided by parasitoid biological control agents.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document