IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v23y2012i1p75-82..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nonlinear effects of group size on the success of wolves hunting elk

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel R. MacNulty
  • Douglas W. Smith
  • L. David Mech
  • John A. Vucetich
  • Craig Packer

Abstract

Despite the popular view that social predators live in groups because group hunting facilitates prey capture, the apparent tendency for hunting success to peak at small group sizes suggests that the formation of large groups is unrelated to prey capture. Few empirical studies, however, have tested for nonlinear relationships between hunting success and group size, and none have demonstrated why success trails off after peaking. Here, we use a unique dataset of observations of individually known wolves (Canis lupus) hunting elk (Cervus elaphus) in Yellowstone National Park to show that the relationship between success and group size is indeed nonlinear and that individuals withholding effort (free riding) is why success does not increase across large group sizes. Beyond 4 wolves, hunting success leveled off, and individual performance (a measure of effort) decreased for reasons unrelated to interference from inept hunters, individual age, or size. But performance did drop faster among wolves with an incentive to hold back, i.e., nonbreeders with no dependent offspring, those performing dangerous predatory tasks, i.e., grabbing and restraining prey, and those in groups of proficient hunters. These results suggest that decreasing performance was free riding and that was why success leveled off in groups with >4 wolves that had superficially appeared to be cooperating. This is the first direct evidence that nonlinear trends in group hunting success reflect a switch from cooperation to free riding. It also highlights how hunting success per se is unlikely to promote formation and maintenance of large groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel R. MacNulty & Douglas W. Smith & L. David Mech & John A. Vucetich & Craig Packer, 2012. "Nonlinear effects of group size on the success of wolves hunting elk," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(1), pages 75-82.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:23:y:2012:i:1:p:75-82.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/arr159
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peña, Jorge & Heifetz, Aviad & Nöldeke, Georg, 2024. "The shirker’s dilemma and the prospect of cooperation in large groups," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 10-23.
    2. Peña, Jorge & Heifetz, Aviad & Nöldeke, Georg, 2023. "The shirker’s dilemma and the prospect of cooperation in large groups," IAST Working Papers 23-152, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST), revised Oct 2023.
    3. Simona Cafazzo & Roberto Bonanni & Paola Valsecchi & Eugenia Natoli, 2014. "Social Variables Affecting Mate Preferences, Copulation and Reproductive Outcome in a Pack of Free-Ranging Dogs," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-14, June.
    4. Kira A. Cassidy & Daniel R. MacNulty & Daniel R. Stahler & Douglas W. Smith & L. David Mech, 2015. "Group composition effects on aggressive interpack interactions of gray wolves in Yellowstone National Park," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1352-1360.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:23:y:2012:i:1:p:75-82.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.