Cargando…

Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?

The availability and quality of forage on the landscape constitute the foodscape within which animals make behavioral decisions to acquire food. Novel changes to the foodscape, such as human disturbance, can alter behavioral decisions that favor avoidance of perceived risk over food acquisition. Alt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dwinnell, Samantha P. H., Sawyer, Hall, Randall, Jill E., Beck, Jeffrey L., Forbey, Jennifer S., Fralick, Gary L., Monteith, Kevin L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6852243/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31301178
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1972
_version_ 1783469787395915776
author Dwinnell, Samantha P. H.
Sawyer, Hall
Randall, Jill E.
Beck, Jeffrey L.
Forbey, Jennifer S.
Fralick, Gary L.
Monteith, Kevin L.
author_facet Dwinnell, Samantha P. H.
Sawyer, Hall
Randall, Jill E.
Beck, Jeffrey L.
Forbey, Jennifer S.
Fralick, Gary L.
Monteith, Kevin L.
author_sort Dwinnell, Samantha P. H.
collection PubMed
description The availability and quality of forage on the landscape constitute the foodscape within which animals make behavioral decisions to acquire food. Novel changes to the foodscape, such as human disturbance, can alter behavioral decisions that favor avoidance of perceived risk over food acquisition. Although behavioral changes and population declines often coincide with the introduction of human disturbance, the link(s) between behavior and population trajectory are difficult to elucidate. To identify a pathway by which human disturbance may affect ungulate populations, we tested the Behaviorally Mediated Forage‐Loss Hypothesis, wherein behavioral avoidance is predicted to reduce use of available forage adjacent to disturbance. We used GPS collar data collected from migratory mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) to evaluate habitat selection, movement patterns, and time‐budgeting behavior in response to varying levels of forage availability and human disturbance in three different populations exposed to a gradient of energy development. Subsequently, we linked animal behavior with measured use of forage relative to human disturbance, forage availability, and quality. Mule deer avoided human disturbance at both home range and winter range scales, but showed negligible differences in vigilance rates at the site level. Use of the primary winter forage, sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), increased as production of new annual growth increased but use decreased with proximity to disturbance. Consequently, avoidance of human disturbance prompted loss of otherwise available forage, resulting in indirect habitat loss that was 4.6‐times greater than direct habitat loss from roads, well pads, and other infrastructure. The multiplicative effects of indirect habitat loss, as mediated by behavior, impaired use of the foodscape by reducing the amount of available forage for mule deer, a consequence of which may be winter ranges that support fewer animals than they did before development.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6852243
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68522432019-11-22 Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape? Dwinnell, Samantha P. H. Sawyer, Hall Randall, Jill E. Beck, Jeffrey L. Forbey, Jennifer S. Fralick, Gary L. Monteith, Kevin L. Ecol Appl Articles The availability and quality of forage on the landscape constitute the foodscape within which animals make behavioral decisions to acquire food. Novel changes to the foodscape, such as human disturbance, can alter behavioral decisions that favor avoidance of perceived risk over food acquisition. Although behavioral changes and population declines often coincide with the introduction of human disturbance, the link(s) between behavior and population trajectory are difficult to elucidate. To identify a pathway by which human disturbance may affect ungulate populations, we tested the Behaviorally Mediated Forage‐Loss Hypothesis, wherein behavioral avoidance is predicted to reduce use of available forage adjacent to disturbance. We used GPS collar data collected from migratory mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) to evaluate habitat selection, movement patterns, and time‐budgeting behavior in response to varying levels of forage availability and human disturbance in three different populations exposed to a gradient of energy development. Subsequently, we linked animal behavior with measured use of forage relative to human disturbance, forage availability, and quality. Mule deer avoided human disturbance at both home range and winter range scales, but showed negligible differences in vigilance rates at the site level. Use of the primary winter forage, sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), increased as production of new annual growth increased but use decreased with proximity to disturbance. Consequently, avoidance of human disturbance prompted loss of otherwise available forage, resulting in indirect habitat loss that was 4.6‐times greater than direct habitat loss from roads, well pads, and other infrastructure. The multiplicative effects of indirect habitat loss, as mediated by behavior, impaired use of the foodscape by reducing the amount of available forage for mule deer, a consequence of which may be winter ranges that support fewer animals than they did before development. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-07-30 2019-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6852243/ /pubmed/31301178 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1972 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecological Applications published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Ecological Society of America This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
Dwinnell, Samantha P. H.
Sawyer, Hall
Randall, Jill E.
Beck, Jeffrey L.
Forbey, Jennifer S.
Fralick, Gary L.
Monteith, Kevin L.
Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?
title Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?
title_full Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?
title_fullStr Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?
title_full_unstemmed Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?
title_short Where to forage when afraid: Does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?
title_sort where to forage when afraid: does perceived risk impair use of the foodscape?
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6852243/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31301178
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1972
work_keys_str_mv AT dwinnellsamanthaph wheretoforagewhenafraiddoesperceivedriskimpairuseofthefoodscape
AT sawyerhall wheretoforagewhenafraiddoesperceivedriskimpairuseofthefoodscape
AT randalljille wheretoforagewhenafraiddoesperceivedriskimpairuseofthefoodscape
AT beckjeffreyl wheretoforagewhenafraiddoesperceivedriskimpairuseofthefoodscape
AT forbeyjennifers wheretoforagewhenafraiddoesperceivedriskimpairuseofthefoodscape
AT fralickgaryl wheretoforagewhenafraiddoesperceivedriskimpairuseofthefoodscape
AT monteithkevinl wheretoforagewhenafraiddoesperceivedriskimpairuseofthefoodscape