Author
Listed:
- Suzanne T S van Beeck Calkoen
- Rebekka Kreikenbohm
- Dries P J Kuijper
- Marco Heurich
- Emilie Snell-Rood
Abstract
This study examined the effect of perceived predation risk imposed by lynx (Lynx lynx) and wolf (Canis lupus) on red deer (Cervus elaphus) foraging behavior under experimental conditions. We hypothesized that in response to large carnivore scent red deer would increase their vigilance, although reducing the frequency and duration of visits to foraging sites. Consequently, browsing intensity on tree saplings was expected to decrease, whereas a higher proportion of more preferred species was expected to be browsed to compensate for higher foraging costs. We expected stronger responses towards the ambush predator lynx, compared with the cursorial predator wolf. These hypotheses were tested in a cafeteria experiment conducted within three red deer enclosures, each containing four experimental plots with olfactory cues of wolf, lynx, cow, and water as control. On each plot, a camera trap was placed and browsing intensity was measured for one consecutive week, repeated three times. Red deer reduced their visitation duration and browsing intensity on plots with large carnivore scent. Despite red deer showing a clear preference for certain tree species, the presence of large carnivore scent did not change selectivity towards different tree species. Contrary to our hypothesis, we found more pronounced effects of wolf (cursorial) compared with lynx (ambush). This study is the first to experimentally assess the perceived risk effects on the red deer foraging behavior of large carnivores differing in hunting modes. Our findings provide insights into the role of olfactory cues in predator–prey interactions and how they can modify fine-scale herbivore–plant interactions.
Suggested Citation
Suzanne T S van Beeck Calkoen & Rebekka Kreikenbohm & Dries P J Kuijper & Marco Heurich & Emilie Snell-Rood, 2021.
"Olfactory cues of large carnivores modify red deer behavior and browsing intensity,"
Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 32(5), pages 982-992.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:beheco:v:32:y:2021:i:5:p:982-992.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:32:y:2021:i:5:p:982-992.. 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.