Rodent foraging is affected by indirect, but not by direct, cues of predation risk.
We used foraging trays to determine whether old field mice, Peromyscus polionotus, altered foraging in response to direct cues of predation risk (urine of native and nonnative predators) and indirect cues of predation risk (foraging microhabitat, precipitation, and moon illumination). The proportion of seeds remaining in each tray (a measure of the giving-up density [GUD]) was used to measure risk perceived by mice. Mice did not alter their GUD when presented with cues of native predators (bobcats, Lynx r ufus , and red foxes, Vulpes vulpes), recently introduced predators (coyotes, Canis latrans ), nonnative predators (ocelots, Leopardus pardalis ), a native herbivore (white-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus), or a water control. Rather, GUD was related to microhabitat: rodents removed more seeds from foraging trays sheltered beneath vegetative cover compared with exposed trays outside of cover. Rodents also removed more seeds during nights with precipitation and when moon illumination was low. Our results suggest that P. polionotus used indirect cues rather than direct cues to assess risk of vertebrate predation. Indirect cues may be more reliable than are direct scent cues for estimating risk from multiple vertebrate predators that present the most risk in open environments.
- Research Organization:
- USDA Forest Service, Savannah River, New Ellenton, SC
- Sponsoring Organization:
- USDOE Office of Environmental Management (EM)
- DOE Contract Number:
- AI09-00SR22188
- OSTI ID:
- 835211
- Report Number(s):
- na; 04-09-P
- Journal Information:
- Behavioral Ecology, Journal Name: Behavioral Ecology Journal Issue: 3 Vol. 15; ISSN 1465-7279
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
White-tailed deer responses to acoustic predator cues are contingent upon past land use and contemporary fire regime
Patch shape, connectivity, and foraging by oldfield mice (Peromyscus polionotus).