Mechanisms of the group-size effect on vigilance in Columbian ground squirrels: dilution versus detection

被引:80
作者
Fairbanks, Bonnie [1 ]
Dobson, F. Stephen [1 ]
机构
[1] Auburn Univ, Dept Biol Sci, Auburn, AL 36830 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Columbian ground squirrel; dilution versus detection; group-size effect; Spermophilus columbianus; vigilance;
D O I
10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.07.002
中图分类号
B84 [心理学]; C [社会科学总论]; Q98 [人类学];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 030303 ; 04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Antipredator vigilance decreases with group size in many vertebrate prey species. This pattern might be explained by collective detection (increased probability of observing a predator) or risk dilution (decreased likelihood of being captured with larger group size). If dilution is the main cause of the group-size effect, nearest-neighbour distances and distance to the edge of the group would affect vigilance, and alarm calling and factors that affect hearing alarm calls would not affect vigilance. The opposite outcomes are expected if detection is the primary influence. We used both model fitting and hypothesis testing to determine which mechanism had the greater effect, using 14 populations of Columbian ground squirrels, Spermophihis columbianus. Vigilance decreased significantly with increases in group size (R-2 = 0.70, P = 0.0002). Model fitting revealed that the detection model was a statistically good fit to our data and the dilution model was not. We found no significant effect of nearest-neighbour distance on the proportion of time vigilant. Distance of individuals to the edge of the meadow habitat had a marginally significant effect on vigilance in one analysis, but no significant effect in three other analyses. Alarm calls occurred in 56.1% of observations and had a significant effect on vigilance. Wind speed did not show a significant effect on proportion of time vigilant during foraging bouts (mixed models: F = 2.41, P = 0.12), but squirrels were observed to forage less in high wind. All of these results support the detection hypothesis. Group type and means of information transfer about predators may be indicators of which mechanism, detection or dilution, has the greatest influence on the group-size effect on vigilance. (c) 2006 The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:115 / 123
页数:9
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], ELK N AM ECOLOGY MAN
[2]   Thirteen-lined ground squirrel (Sciuridae: Spermophilus tridecemlineatus) antipredator vigilance:: Monitoring the sky for aerial predators [J].
Arenz, CL ;
Leger, DW .
ETHOLOGY, 1999, 105 (09) :807-816
[3]  
ARMITAGE KENNETH B., 1962, ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR, V10, P319, DOI 10.1016/0003-3472(62)90055-6
[4]   Predation-sensitive grouping and habitat use by eastern grey kangaroos: a field experiment [J].
Banks, PB .
ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR, 2001, 61 :1013-1021
[5]  
Barash D.P., 1973, Animal Behav Monogr, V6, P171, DOI 10.1016/0003-3472(73)90002-X
[6]   Re-examining safety in numbers: interactions between risk dilution and collective detection depend upon predator targeting behaviour [J].
Bednekoff, PA ;
Lima, SL .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 1998, 265 (1409) :2021-2026
[7]  
Bertram B.C.R., 1978, P64
[8]   Insular tammar wallabies (Macropus eugenii) respond to visual but not acoustic cues from predators [J].
Blumstein, DT ;
Daniel, JC ;
Griffin, AS ;
Evans, CS .
BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY, 2000, 11 (05) :528-535
[9]   Yellow-footed rock-wallaby group size effects reflect a trade-off. [J].
Blumstein, DT ;
Daniel, JC ;
Evans, CS .
ETHOLOGY, 2001, 107 (07) :655-664
[10]   An experimental test of predator detection rates using groups of free-living emus [J].
Boland, CRJ .
ETHOLOGY, 2003, 109 (03) :209-222