Evol Ecol Res 13: 869-878 (2011)     Full PDF if your library subscribes.

The foraging response of gerbils to a gradient of owl numbers

Justin R. St. Juliana1,2, Burt P. Kotler2, Joel S. Brown3, Shomen Mukherjee4 and Amos Bouskila5

1Department of Biology, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, Indiana, USA, 2Mitrani Department of Desert Ecology, Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Midreshet Ben-Gurion, Israel, 3Department of Biological Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 4Marine Sciences Program, Department of Biology, Florida International University, North Miami, Florida, USA and 5Department of Life Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Be’er Sheva, Israel

Correspondence: J.R. St. Juliana, Department of Biology, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN 47809, USA.
e-mail: jrstjuliana@gmail.com


Background: While many studies have addressed a prey’s behavioural responses to predators, very few have tested how the prey’s anti-predator behaviour changes as a function of predator number.

Hypotheses: Encounter rate with predators should increase with increasing numbers of predators, thus increasing the predation risk (a cost of foraging) for prey individuals. With increased predation risk, prey animals should quit foraging sooner, and leave more resources behind. Increased predation risk should also cause prey to devote more attention to predator detection and less to foraging. This redirection of attention should result in lower harvest rates, and a higher quitting harvest rate for the prey.

Organisms: Prey: Allenbyi’s gerbil, Gerbillus andersoni allenbyi, a psammophilic, 25-g desert rodent. Predator: barn owl, Tyto alba.

Methods: We allowed gerbils to forage in a large outdoor aviary in Sede Boker, Israel, subject to various risks of predation (i.e. in the presence of 0, 1, 2, or 3 barn owls). We measured gerbil giving-up densities (GUDs), the amount of food left behind by gerbils foraging in artificial resource patches. In each trial, resource patches were set up in different microhabitats with different arrangements of seeds. Comparing GUDs between these resource patches provided a gauge of the gerbils’ perceived risk of predation and apprehension (a forager’s redirection of attention from foraging to predator detection).

Results: Gerbils had higher GUDs when owls were present. Furthermore, gerbils increased their apprehensiveness when more owls were present in the aviary. The increase in gerbil GUD with each additional owl was less than additive.

Keywords: foraging, foraging theory, gerbil, giving-up density, multiple predators, optimal foraging, owl, prey behaviour, predator, predation.

IF you are connected using the IP of a subscribing institution (library, laboratory, etc.)
or through its VPN.


        © 2011 Justin R. St. Juliana. All EER articles are copyrighted by their authors. All authors endorse, permit and license Evolutionary Ecology Ltd. to grant its subscribing institutions/libraries the copying privileges specified below without additional consideration or payment to them or to Evolutionary Ecology, Ltd. These endorsements, in writing, are on file in the office of Evolutionary Ecology, Ltd. Consult authors for permission to use any portion of their work in derivative works, compilations or to distribute their work in any commercial manner.

       Subscribing institutions/libraries may grant individuals the privilege of making a single copy of an EER article for non-commercial educational or non-commercial research purposes. Subscribing institutions/libraries may also use articles for non-commercial educational purposes by making any number of copies for course packs or course reserve collections. Subscribing institutions/libraries may also loan single copies of articles to non-commercial libraries for educational purposes.

       All copies of abstracts and articles must preserve their copyright notice without modification.